Ferry v. American Suction Gas Producer Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Ingham; Wisner, J., presiding. Case by Eddie M. Eerry against the American Suction Gas Producer Company for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. Defendant is engaged in the manufacturing business in the city of Lansing.
Read the full summary
Error to Ingham; Wisner, J., presiding. Case by Eddie M. Eerry against the American Suction Gas Producer Company for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error. Defendant is engaged in the manufacturing business in the city of Lansing. In its shop, which was about 100 feet long and 45 feet wide, was an electric traveling crane used for the purpose of lifting and moving heavy articles from one part of the shop to another. It moved on girders about 12 or 15 feet above the floor. Its mechanism seems to have been…
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
(after stating the facts). 1. Duty of warning. It is not contended by plaintiff that the duty resting on defendant of giving warning to plaintiff was a non-delegable duty for the performance of which defendant was responsible. It is contended, however, that a duty rested upon defendant to provide a method of warning, that this duty was a non-delegable duty and that it was not performed in this case. Whether such a duty rested upon defendant or not we do not feel called upon to determine, for we think the evidence proves that if there was such a duty, it was fully performed. It is true that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Guest v. Edison Illuminating Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1907
- Amoe v. Great Lakes Engineering WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
3Cited by2 opinions
- Argersinger v. Commonwealth Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1911
- McCauley v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1911