Muse v. . Motor Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Action for damages. Plaintiff alleges that he was injured by defendant's negligence under the following circumstances. It was (467) the duty of the plaintiff, as an employee of the defendant, to paint automobile bodies for Ford cars. The painting is done in this way: The paint is placed in an overhead tank with a hose attached; underneath this overhead tank is what is called the drip pan, which is in the share of a square with an open end. The Automobile bodies are placed on trucks, the bodies being longer and broader than the trucks and so project from the sides and ends of the trucks. The…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad v. HawthorneSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Dougan v. . Champlain Transportation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Blackmore v. . WindersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. ClemIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Shelton v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Fanelty v. Rogers Jewelers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- King v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Mintz v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Osier v. the Consumers' CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1925
- Daughtry v. ClineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.