Legal Opinion
Barr v. Guelph Patent Cask Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided January 7, 1902PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Error to Benzie; Chittenden, J. Case by Emma Barr, administratrix of the estate of Daniel Barr, deceased, against the Guelph Patent Cask Company, for the alleged negligent killing of plaintiff’s intestate. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
The plaintiff is the widow and administratrix of the estate of Daniel Barr, who was killed while at work for the defendant in the basement of its sawmill. The negligence counted upon in the declaration is:
“(a) Failing to provide a place reasonably light and safe for deceased to work in, and to safely and properly place its machinery.
“(b) Taking deceased from his work piling lumber in defendant’s yard (he being, to the knowledge of the defendant, wholly inexperienced in the use and care of machinery) without warning him of the dangers incident to the new duties assigned to him.
“(c) Especially…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Elwood v. . the Western Union Telegraph Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Hamilton v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Michigan Pipe Co. v. Michigan Fire & Marine InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Sakol v. RickelMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Emlaw v. EmlawMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Christiansen v. HilberMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- Klat v. Chrysler Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
- England v. &198tna Life Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Lobenstein v. Whitehead & Kales Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Hosking v. Cleveland Iron Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.