Havholm v. Whale Creek Iron Works
New York Supreme Court
Action by Peter Leo Havholm against the Whale Creek iron Works. Motion for new trial after verdict for defendant.
1Opinion of the CourtCrane, J.
[ 1 ] Whether or not the saw was properly guarded in accordance with the statute (Labor Law [Consol. Laws 1909, c. 31] §81) was a question for the jury. While a cage was concededly on the machine, suspended about three feet above the table and occasionally used by being pulled down over the saw, yet its position and infrequent use prevented the court from holding as a matter of law that the employer’s duty had been fulfilled. If therefore material incompetent evidence was admitted over the plaintiff’s objection a new trial must be granted.
Relying upon King v. Reid, 124 App. Div. 121, 108 N.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Davis v. . Supreme Lodge, Knights of HonorNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Mutual Benefit Life Insurance v. TisdaleSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Buffalo Loan, Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Knights Templar & Masonic Mutual Aid Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- B.L., T. S.D. Co. v. . K.T. M.M.A. Assn.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Beglin v. . Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.