American Shipbuilding Co. v. Lorenski
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Wm. E. Day, Judge. Actions by Lawrence Lorenski and by Frank Lewandowski against the American Shipbuilding Company. Judgment for plaintiff in each case, and defendant brings error. These two cases were heard together both below and here, and will be disposed of in this opinion.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Wm. E. Day, Judge. Actions by Lawrence Lorenski and by Frank Lewandowski against the American Shipbuilding Company. Judgment for plaintiff in each case, and defendant brings error. These two cases were heard together both below and here, and will be disposed of in this opinion. Damages for personal injuries were sought and recovered in each case upon pleadings substantially alike and upon the same evidence, except as to description and extent of the injuries sustained. No evidence was…
1Opinion of the CourtWabrington, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1 ] The contention of the company is that the court erred in overr ruling the motion to direct a verdict and in its charge to the jury. Both of these features of error are based on the claim that if any negligence intervened it was the negligence of one or more of plaintiffs’ fellow servants and not of the company. The theory is that the structure was simply temporary staging to be used in the building of *42a. steamboat, and was constructed by carpenters and laborers working together and under the direction, respectively, of a foreman for each class; that…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Armour v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Kreigh v. Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Chambers v. American Tin Plate Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1904
- Hales v. Michigan Cent. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- F. C. Austin Mfg. Co. v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Globe S. S. Co. v. MossCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
- Kuptz v. Ralph Sollitt & Sons Const. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1937
- Wallace v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1926
- F. W. Martin & Co. v. CobbCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
- Hartman v. Toyo Kisen Kaisha S. S. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.