O'Connor v. Whittall
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff, while in the defendant’s employ, by having his hand caught in a machine. The declaration contained three counts, the first two at common law, and the third under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows.
Read the full summary
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff, while in the defendant’s employ, by having his hand caught in a machine. The declaration contained three counts, the first two at common law, and the third under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The machine on which the plaintiff was injured was called a duster or feeder, and was a device connected with a picker, consisting of an apron which carried wool laid upon it up to and under a roller, whence it was carried…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
The plaintiff was injured by having his hand caught in the teeth of the roller, and drawn in and crushed. He was a little less than sixteen years of age, and had never worked in a mill till he was set to work on the machine by which he was injured, a few days before the accident occurred. He seems to have been a bright boy, and when he went to work he was shown how to spread the wool over the apron, and was told to look out for the roller, and said in reply, “ All right.” It must have been apparent even to a boy of his limited experience that it would be dangerous to get his hand caught in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sullivan v. India Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Ciriack v. Merchants' Woolen Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Ciriack v. Merchants' Woolen Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Downey v. SawyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Crowley v. Pacific MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Stager v. Troy Laundry Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Burke v. DavisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- McLeod v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Silvia v. Sagamore Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Jones v. Vance Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.