Rogers v. Ludlow Manufacturing Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for injuries sustained by the plaintiff on December 5, 1884, while in the defendant’s employ. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., the evidence for the plaintiff tended to show the following facts : The plaintiff was injured while at work on a carding machine. This machine consists of a large cylinder covered with a strip of wood, called the lag. In this strip card-pins are driven.
Read the full summary
Tort, for injuries sustained by the plaintiff on December 5, 1884, while in the defendant’s employ. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., the evidence for the plaintiff tended to show the following facts : The plaintiff was injured while at work on a carding machine. This machine consists of a large cylinder covered with a strip of wood, called the lag. In this strip card-pins are driven. Back of this cylinder is another called the worker, which works flax or jute into form to pass over the cylinder. This is also covered by a lag. Above the worker and the large cylinder,…
1Opinion of the CourtField, J.
As we construe the charge of the presiding judge, and as we think it must have been understood by the jury, we find nothing in the exceptions that requires comment except the refusal to give the third ^instruction requested, and the instructions given in place of it. This request was taken from the opinion in McGee v. Boston Cordage Co. 139 Mass. 445, 448, with a slight change. In that opinion it was said that “ the making of such ordinary repairs as the use of the machine required to keep it in order from-day to day may be entrusted to servants.” The request includes all ordinary repairs…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. HerbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Barbaroux v. BarkerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
- Benzing v. . Steinway and SonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Holden v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Johnson v. Boston Tow-Boat Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Ryalls v. Mechanics' MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Moynihan v. Hills Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Cosden Pipe Line Co. v. BerrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
- Doherty v. BoothMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.