Legal Opinion

Amburg v. International Paper Co.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided February 23, 1903PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On motion by defendant. Motion sustained. Action for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while in tlie employ of the defendant corporation. The jury returned a verdict of $587.50 for the plaintiff. The case is stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSavage, J.

The plaintiff, a servant of the defendant, was injured in the following manner: The defendant’s foreman with a crew of men of whom the plaintiff claimed to be one, were engaged in the defendant’s machine shop removing a heavy iron press-roll from a lathe to the floor. The roll was first lifted by the use of double chain falls, or a chain fall at each end, until it cleared the lathe. Then the foreman tied an inch rope, which he says was found lying there on the floor, around the middle of the roll, and attached it to a single chain fall which hung about four feet from the lathe. By operating…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cregan v. . MarstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Johnson v. Boston Tow-Boat Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Towne v. United Electric Gas & Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Paulson v. Bettendorf Axle Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  3. Roberg v. Houston & Tex. C. R.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1920
  4. Roberg v. Houston & Tex. C. R.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1920

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API