Legal Opinion

Sweeney v. Winebaum

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided February 4, 1930PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Allen, J,

The' defendants are understood to concede that the intestate may be regarded as an employee of theirs in helping to carry the box, and it is their position that he assumed the risk of the injury he received. The position is well taken.

The plaintiff had the burden to show that the risk was not assumed (Zajac v. Company, 81 N. H. 257, 261, and cases cited), and so far as appears, the intestate knew as well as the defendants of his impaired health and how far it was proper for him to undergo strain. And there is nothing to show that he did not know as well as they did how much strain he…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Tullgren v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
  2. Zajac v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1924
  3. Nourie v. TheobaldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1896
  4. Proulx v. GoodrichSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1914
  5. Monteith v. Manchester Rendering Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1925

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Perreault v. Allen Oil Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API