Malsky v. Schumacher & Ettlinger
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from trial term. Action by William Maisky, an infant, by Nathan Krauskoff, Ms guardian ad litem, against Schumacher & Ettlinger, a corporation, to recover damages for personal injuries. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the CourtBookstaver, J.
On Saturday, July 7,1889, Louis Maisky, the father of the plaintiff, applied at the place of business of the defendant corporation for employment for his minor son. He asked for light work for him, and was told to bring his son the following Monday, and he would obtain employment. There was no restriction as to the Mnd of work which he was to do, other than that it should be light. According to the father’s testimony, the plaintiff was not with him when this arrangement was made, but waited for him outside. On Monday the father took his son to the defendant’s place of business, but did not go…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Crispin v. . BabbittNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Hickey v. . TaaffeNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Loughlin v. . State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Weston v. . City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Wiwirowski v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Haverhill v. International Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
- Gumienny v. HessMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Clark v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- Davis v. BonnCity of New York Municipal Court · 1895
- Hatfield v. McGinnissAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1903