Legal Opinion

Daley v. American Printing Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 11, 1889PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Tort for personal injuries. The declaration alleged that the “plaintiff was employed by defendant to work in its mill; that it was the duty of defendant to furnish plaintiff with proper, safe, and suitable machinery and implements to work; that defendant, wholly regardless of this duty, negligently and carelessly furnished plaintiff with dangerous and improper and defective machinery and implements with which to perform his work; that by reason of this negligence and…

Read the full summary

Tort for personal injuries. The declaration alleged that the “plaintiff was employed by defendant to work in its mill; that it was the duty of defendant to furnish plaintiff with proper, safe, and suitable machinery and implements to work; that defendant, wholly regardless of this duty, negligently and carelessly furnished plaintiff with dangerous and improper and defective machinery and implements with which to perform his work; that by reason of this negligence and carelessness of defendant, while plaintiff was engaged in the work for which he was employed by defendant, and while he was in…

1Opinion of the CourtC. Allen, J.

There was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff was employed on work which required him to use the elevator; that the elevator was operated by a belt which passed over a pulley situated about twenty feet from the elevator ; that the belt was off from the pulley; and that the plaintiff’s injury occurred while he was putting it on, in order to enable him to use the elevator in doing his work. It seems to have become a question, at the trial, whether it was necessary for the plaintiff himself to attend to putting on the belt, under the circumstances which then existed. The plaintiff had…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Washington & Georgetown Railroad v. McDadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. St. Louis Cordage Co. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
  3. Neeley v. Southwestern Cotton Seed Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1903
  4. DeJesus v. YogelMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  5. Laplante v. Warren Cotton MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API