Maines v. Harbison-Walker Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 183, Oct. T., 1905, by-plaintiff, from order of C. P. Cambria Co., Sept. T., 1902, No. 263, refusing to take off compulsory nonsuit in case of Daniel Maines v. The Harbison-Walker Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before O’Connor, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off. jError assigned was order refusing to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potteb,
The Harbison-Walker Company is engaged in the manufacture of fire brick and owns works at Blandburg, Cambria county, Pa. During the process of manufacture at these works, the fire clay, after being ground, was placed in circular pans for the purpose of mixing. The mixed clay was formerly shoveled out of the pans by hand, and placed upon trucks to be conveyed to the molds. But later, an improvement was introduced, called a “pan emptier” to carry the mortar from the pans to the trucks. This emptier consisted of a frame, carrying a revolving belt, passing around a…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Bowen v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Franczak v. Nazareth Cement Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Hartman v. Reading Wood Pulley Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Lemon v. Lonker Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Stirling v. Merchant & Evans Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.