Toomey v. Donovan

The plaintiff contends that there was- evidence tending to show that the defendants were liable at common law, and also under § 4 of the employer’s liability act, St. of 1887, c. 270.

The defendants concede that the jury would have been warranted in finding that _the plaintiff was in the exercise of due care, and that the machine was out of repair; but they insist that at common law there was no evidence tending to show that they were under any obligation to keep the machine in repair, or that thejr owed any duty to the plaintiff in that regard, and that under § 4 of the employers’ liability…