Brenneman v. P. H. Glatfelter Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 19, March T., 1915, by defendant, from judgment of 0. P. York Co., Aug. T., 1913, No. 110, on verdict for plaintiff in case of J. H. Brenneman v. P. II. Glatfelter Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Wanner, J. At the trial it appeared that the plaintiff who was nineteen years of age was injured lvkile working at cog machinery which was alleged to have not been properly guarded.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 19, March T., 1915, by defendant, from judgment of 0. P. York Co., Aug. T., 1913, No. 110, on verdict for plaintiff in case of J. H. Brenneman v. P. II. Glatfelter Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Wanner, J. At the trial it appeared that the plaintiff who was nineteen years of age was injured lvkile working at cog machinery which was alleged to have not been properly guarded. The defendant offered evidence tending to show that it was not practicable to guard the machinery at the point where the injury occurred. Defendant presented the following…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
One of the alleged acts of negligence on which the plaintiff declared was the failure of the defendant company to properly guard certain cog machinery at the point where the plaintiff ivas injured. The learned trial-judge, after proper instructions, left it to the jury to determine whether or not, under the evidence, it was feasible and practicable to have guarded that particular portion of the machinery. We are of opinion he could not properly have done otherwise.
In Cappuccio v. Plumb, in which an opinion was handed down in July last, this court said:' “Section eleven of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kelliher v. Brown & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914