Legal Opinion

Goldberg v. Friedrich

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 3, 1924No. Appeal, No. 72PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

Plaintiff’s declaration contained averments that Louis Goldberg was a minor under the age of sixteen, in the employ of defendant, and was put to work on a certain machine used to crown bottles; that while illegally and unlawfully employed, his hand was caught in the machine, crushed, and the finger bones broken; that defendant was negligent in putting a minor under the age of sixteen to work at a dangerous occupation without explaining it to him; that the employment was in violation of various named acts of assembly, but the Child Labor Act of 1915 was not…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hall v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  2. Allen v. Tuscarora Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  3. Krutlies v. Bulls Head Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  4. Hogarty v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  5. Mays v. United Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Godina v. OSWALDSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  2. Miners Savings Bank v. NaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Wilkinson v. United Parcel Service of Pennsylvania, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Otto v. American Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. Commonwealth v. Shipley Humble Oil Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API