Cuca v. Lackawanna Steel Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, the Lackawanna Steel Company, from aii order of the Supreme Court, made at the Erie Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Erie on the 16th day of February, 1910, directing the defendant to “ permit the plaintiff, Steve Cuca, and a representative to forthwith inspect the place in defendant’s premises at the city of Lackawanna, New York, where the accident to the plaintiff occurred, and the engine, car, connecting bar…
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant, the Lackawanna Steel Company, from aii order of the Supreme Court, made at the Erie Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Erie on the 16th day of February, 1910, directing the defendant to “ permit the plaintiff, Steve Cuca, and a representative to forthwith inspect the place in defendant’s premises at the city of Lackawanna, New York, where the accident to the plaintiff occurred, and the engine, car, connecting bar between them, the roadbed and track over which such, engine and car was* being operated at the time of the accident, and…
1Opinion of the Court
McLennan, P. J.:
As to the first objection. The allegations of the complaint, so far as they charge the defendant with negligence, are in effect: 1. That the defendant at the time of the accident did not have competent and skillful engineers in charge and control of the running of said engine. 2. That it did not provide a suitable, safe and sufficient roadbed over which to operate its engines and cars at said plant. 3. That it did not see to it that the engines and cars were properly inspected and maintained. 4. That it did not supply plaintiff with suitable and safe means,, material,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Schlueter Manufacturing Co. v. BeckSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
- Chojnacki v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1912