Ewan v. Lippincott
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On a rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted. The facts will appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Reed, J.
This action was brought to recover damages for an injury received by the plaintiff in the mill of the defendant. The plaintiff is a machinist, and while at work upon the water-wheel of defendant’s saw-mill the wheel was suddenly put in motion by the engineer employed by the defendant, and the hand of the plaintiff was crushed.
The trial justice charged the jury, inter alia, that if the accident was the result of the negligent act of the engineer then the defendant, the master of the engineer, was responsible for the result. In answer to the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kimball v. CushmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- McCosker v. . Long Island Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Johnson v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Besel v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Valtez v. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.