Legal Opinion

Helling v. Schindler

California Supreme Court

Decided November 11, 1904No. S.F. No. 3036PublishedCited by 35 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff was employed by defendant as a wheelwright, and his left hand was badly cut by the knives of a buzz-planer while he was using such planer in the course of his employment. His claim, as set forth in his complaint, was that, at the time of the accident, the planer “was out of repair and unsafe for the uses and purposes for which said machine and apparatus were intended, to wit: the knives and apparatus thereof were dull, and the belt thereof connecting said machine with the power-shaft of said plant and putting said machine and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sappenfield v. Main Street & Agricultural Park RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Cregan v. . MarstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. Turner v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Nalley v. Hartford Carpet Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
  5. James v. JamesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Ault v. International Harvester Co.California Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Hatfield v. Levy BrothersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Daggett v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Laurenzi v. VranizanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Oldenburg v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1957

30 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