Legal Opinion

Cronin v. Russel Wheel & Foundry Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1903No. Docket No. 51PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Wayne; Donovan, J. Case by George Cronin against the Russel Wheel & Foundry Company for personal injuries. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant for damages sustained by him, claimed to be caused by being furnished an unsafe instrument with which to work in a dangerous place. The trial court directed a verdict for defendant. The sole question is whether it should have been submitted to the jury.

The defendant company was engaged in constructing for the Detroit Gas Works an apparatus for hoisting coal out of vessels at the dock and unloading it. The plaintiff had been in the employ of defendant for two months before he was injured. He had worked for it prior to his last…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Allen v. G. W. & F. Smith Iron Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  2. Manning v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Lamotte v. BoyceMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Rawley v. ColliauMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Kehoe v. AllenMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bates v. ShafferMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Pope v. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  3. Pope v. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API