Legal Opinion

Dougherty v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 4, 1934No. Appeals, 256 and 257PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

The H. C. Aberle Company, hosiery manufacturers, desiring to move several large and heavy pieces of machinery from one part of their plant to another, consulted appellant, Proctor & Schwartz, Inc., from whom they had bought the machines, for expert advice as to the manner of moving. Pointing out that it was dangerous to move the machines without taking them apart, Proctor & Schwartz, suggested that they should send one of their skilled mechanics to do the work, at a charge of $1.75 an hour for the man’s time. The Aberle Company agreed to this arrangement, and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McColligan v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  2. Kelley v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Baldwin v. MagenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Kraemer v. Guarantee Trust & Safe Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  5. Festi v. Proctor & Schwartz, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Mature v. AngeloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  2. Siidekum v. Animal Rescue League of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Kimble v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Onofrey v. WolliverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Dunmire v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944

15 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