Hannegan v. Union Warehouse Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from special term, Kings county. Action by Joseph Hannegan against the Union Warehouse Companjr and others to recover for personal injuries received while working as a laborer by reason of the breaking of hoisting apparatus-while unloading a vessel. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants, appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtPratt, J.
An objection is made to pluintiff’s recovery on the ground that defendants owed no duty to plaintiff. We do not think. *273that objection tenable. There was testimony tending to show that defendants and plaintiff’s employer, for their mutual advantage, combined their forces, and removed the sugar from the ship directly to the warehouse, defendants supplying a few men, with trucks and slings, and plaintiff’s employers supplying most of the laborers, plaintiff being one of them. This was mutually advantageous, as by this course the sugar had to be handled but twice, instead of four times. Under…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Kelly v. TyraSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Connors v. Great Northern Elevator Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- Sawmill Const. Co. v. BrightMississippi Supreme Court · 1917
- Pace v. GibsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
- Wise v. LillieSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911