Regnier v. Rand
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for negligence. The plaintiff, who worked in the defendant’s sawmill, struck his hand against an unguarded slab saw. There were four other men engaged in manual labor, employed in and about the mill. The question whether the plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of Laws 1911, c. 163, was transferred without a ruling by Allen, J., from the January term, 1919, of the superior court.
1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.
The fact the plaintiff’s work required him to stand very near a saw would warrant a finding that the defendant was negligent in leaving it unguarded. Osman v. Company, 78 N. H. 597. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of Laws 1911, c. 163, ss. 1, 2, depends on what the legislature intended when it enacted c. 1, sub. div. (b). The language the legislature used is all the evidence there is relevant to that issue, and in so far as that is material to the question we are considering, section one reads as follows: “This act shall apply only to workmen engaged in manual or mechanical…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boody v. K. & C. Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1914
- Morin v. Nashua Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918
- Osman v. W. H. McElwain Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1916
3Cited by1 opinion
- White v. Boulia-Gorrell Lumber Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932