Legal Opinion

Harvey v. Welch

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 6, 1932PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

The issue of the defendant’s fault was for the jury. Having undertaken to use in his business a substance admittedly known by him to be poisonous, the defendant owed to the plaintiff a duty to use reasonable care to warn and instruct him with reference to the dangers incident to such use and to furnish him with a reasonably safe place in which to work. Th’ere was enough evidence to justify the conclusion that the defendant failed to perform either of these duties. It was conceded that no warning as to the danger of oxalic acid poisoning was given to the plaintiff and that he was not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Thompson v. United Laboratories Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
  2. Pinkley v. Chicago & Eastern Illinois RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Mooney v. Monark Gasoline & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1927

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Perreault v. Allen Oil Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1935
  2. Symons v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
  3. Crowley v. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1954
  4. Middlebrooks v. Atlanta Metallic Casket Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
  5. Allen Gravel Co. v. CurtisMississippi Supreme Court · 1935

5 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