Fioranza v. Rinehart & Dennis Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, Rinehart & Dennis Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Westchester on the 22d day of April, 1914, upon the verdict of a jury for $7,500, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on or about the 21st day of April, 1914, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant, Rinehart & Dennis Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Westchester on the 22d day of April, 1914, upon the verdict of a jury for $7,500, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on or about the 21st day of April, 1914, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. The action is to recover for the death of plaintiff’s intestate, who was killed by an explosion of dynamite while engaged in blasting for the defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Thomas, J.:
The testimony of Bolton, the superintendent, is to the effect that Fioranza recommended that he was competent to act as powder man, and that he did act for some months as such, and that he was superior to De G-uilio. Two of the three fellow-servants testified that they had seen him engaged in deep-hole blasting on some occasions, although they seek to make them exceptional. At least, after De G-uilio left,. Fioranza four days *463before the accident became the powder man, and thereby-accepted a dangerous position with implied representation of capacity, certainly with some experience,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Cavanagh v. . McGovernNew York Court of Appeals · 1917