Legal Opinion

Obanhein v. Arbuckle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1903PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Motion by the plaintiff, John Obanhein, for a new trial upon a case containing exceptions, ordered to be heard at the Appellate Division in the first instance, upon the dismissal of the complaint by direction of the court after a trial at the Kings County Trial Term.

1Opinion of the Court

Hirschberg, J.:

The learned counsel for the plaintiff admits that he can find no decision in point and my research has been equally unavailing. A recovery will depend upon the right of a servant to maintain an action in tort for damages resulting from negligence on the part of the master in failing to furnish safe tools and appliances where the servant having full knowledge of the defects is induced to continue work by the master’s promise to soon supply safe and proper tools and appliances and meanwhile indemnify the servant for any incidental injury. The question presented is whether in case…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dowd v. New York, Ontario & Western Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. Hannigan v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  3. Rice v. Eureka Paper Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Daurizio v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co.New York Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Baumwald v. TrenkmanAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904
  3. Carron v. Standard Refrigerator Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API