Legal Opinion

Labuck v. Mill Creek Coal Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 5, 1927No. Appeal, 297PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

Plaintiff, a duly qualified miner, with a companion, was engaged in driving a gangway. Four holes were bored in its face, two at the bottom and two at the top. These were loaded with dynamite and charged for firing. The fuse was lighted and the men retired to places of safety to await the explosion. Two of the charges went off, as did the cap on a third, but one of the charges missed fire. Plaintiff, with his companion, waited for twenty minutes, then opened the airline, blew out the smoke and entered the gangway. One of the remaining charges then exploded,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kuca v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Watkins v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Zelazny v. Seneca Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Roach v. Oswald Lever Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Paul Gima v. the Hudson Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Haywood v. Henrietta Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  3. Krischunas v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Sinko v. Bethlehem Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  5. Puza v. P. & R. C. & I. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929

12 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