Bodwell v. Nashua Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff while a night watchman in the defendants’ mills, by reason of their neglect to provide him a safe place in which to work.
Read the full summary
Case, for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff while a night watchman in the defendants’ mills, by reason of their neglect to provide him a safe place in which to work. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to prove that on the night in question his way was obstructed by some planks which had been insecurely piled by carpenters during the preceding day; that he saw the planks' and walked safely over them once, but on his return caught his foot, and fell; that his view was obscured by escaping steam; and that a week before the defendants had promised to-repair the pipe…
1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, J.
If there were any dangers which contributed to the plaintiff’s injury of which he was not fully informed, they were caused by the acts of his fellow-servants. Nash v. Company, 62. N. H. 406.
The promise to repair was not shown to have any connection with the plaintiff’s continuation in the employment. “No case . . . lias gone so far as to bold that where the servant does not complain on bis own account, and continues in bis employment with full knowledge of the risk, he can recover of the master, because the latter, when the defective condition was called to his attention by the servant, gave…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lewis v. New York & New England RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
3Cited by9 opinions
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. GarrenTexas Supreme Court · 1903
- Sevigny v. J. Spaulding & Sons Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1924
- St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. MealmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1908
- Roy v. HodgeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907
- Coughlin v. Arms Textile Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.