Legal Opinion
Hardie v. New York Harbor Dry Dock Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided November 16, 1925No. 79PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
We cannot see that the defendant failed to furnish the intestate with a safe way to his work. The route over the bridge deck was certainly such, and it was obviously open to those who did not care to use the dark route over the main deck between door and door. Two of the intestate’s fellows had used it before him, and it was a compliance with the master’s duty to furnish a safe way. If there be two ways, one safe and the other dangerous, the servant chooses the dangerous way at his peril, if the difference is known to him. Beulah Coal Co. v. Verburgh, 292 F.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Rohrbacher v. . GilligNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- The SaratogaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1899
- H. D. Williams Cooperage Co. v. HeadrickCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
- The HeliosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1882
- Burrell v. FlemingCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1901
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Holm v. Cities Service Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Long v. Silver Line, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- Badalamenti v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- McDonald v. Jarka Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.