Moody v. Hamilton Manufacturing Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff while in the defendant’s employ. Tne second count of the declaration was as follows: “ And the plaintiff says that on or about April 15,1891, while the plaintiff was in the employ of the defendant as a servant for hire, and in the exercise of due care, he received great personal injuries owing to the carelessness and negligence of the defendant and its agents directing him to work on or about a carboy of vitriol or…
Read the full summary
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff while in the defendant’s employ. Tne second count of the declaration was as follows: “ And the plaintiff says that on or about April 15,1891, while the plaintiff was in the employ of the defendant as a servant for hire, and in the exercise of due care, he received great personal injuries owing to the carelessness and negligence of the defendant and its agents directing him to work on or about a carboy of vitriol or sulphuric acid which was defective and dangerous, and the defendant and its agents carelessly and negligently failed to…
1Opinion of the CourtLathrop, J.
There is no evidence in this case of any negligence on the part of the defendant in respect to its selection of a competent overseer and competent servants. So far as the evidence shows negligence on the part of any one it is on the part of one Garner, who was the defendant’s yard-master, and who exercised authority over the plaintiff, who was a yard man.
While there is a conflict of authority in this country on the subject, the rule is well established in this Commonwealth that the fact that one servant has control over another is immaterial, and that a master is not responsible, at common…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Zeigler v. DayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Rogers v. Ludlow Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- McKinnon v. NorcrossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Hodgkins v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Duffy v. UptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Donnelly v. San Francisco Bridge Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Cross v. Passumpsic Fibre Leather Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1916
- Grebenstein v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Dill v. MarmonIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
- Granara v. JacobsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.