Legal Opinion

Hopwood v. Benjamin Atha & Illingsworth Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided March 2, 1903PublishedCited by 3 opinions

On error to tbe Supreme Court.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Pitney, J.

The plaintiff below was employed as an ordinary laborer in the steel foundry of the defendant company. At the time of the occurrence that gave rise to this action he was engaged with other workmen in moving from one part of the works to another certain heavy iron frames known as “flasks” or “boxes.” In so doing they were required to lift the flasks from a tram car to the floor of the foundry, using a hoisting-crane for this purpose. In order to facilitate handling, the several flasks were formed with trunnions on either side. The evidence…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fivey v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
  2. The Nord Deutscher Lloyd Steamship Co. v. IngebregstenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1894
  3. Commonwealth Roofing Co. v. Palmer Leather Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
  4. Fenderson v. Atlantic City RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1894

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. HeimlichCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1904
  2. Hirsch v. C. W. Leatherbee Lumber Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
  3. Loid v. J. S. Rogers Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API