Crimmins v. Farquhar
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 208, Jan. T., 1915, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. York Co., Jan. T., 1911, No. 97, on verdict for defendant in case of James Crimmins v. A. B. Farqúhar Company, Ltd. Trespass for personal injuries. Before Ross, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict for defendant and judgment thereon. Plaintiff appealed. Errors assigned, among others, were rulings on evidence and the charge to the jury.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Moschzisker,
The plaintiff, James Crimmins, sued in trespass to recover for the loss of an eye, which he alleged was due to the negligence of the defendant; the evidence was in conflict, and the case was submitted to. the jury, who rendered a verdict for the defendant; - the plaintiff has appealed.
*571The plaintiff’s testimony showed that he was an experienced workman, forty years old, who had served in and about foundries, such as that conducted by the defendant, for nearly 20 years; that the defendant employed him as a general laborer; that on March 1,1913, a leak occurred…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Betcher v. RinamanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- McCanuel v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916