Welsh v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. Upon the trial in the court below, upon a complaint alleging that the plaintiff’s intestate was killed by an accident while employed in operating the hoisting works of the defendant in error, and alleging that the accident resulted from the negligence of the defendant in error, first, in allowing a friction clutch to be and remain defective, and, second, in allowing a set screw to extend beyond…
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon. Upon the trial in the court below, upon a complaint alleging that the plaintiff’s intestate was killed by an accident while employed in operating the hoisting works of the defendant in error, and alleging that the accident resulted from the negligence of the defendant in error, first, in allowing a friction clutch to be and remain defective, and, second, in allowing a set screw to extend beyond the surface of a set collar, without being guarded as required by law, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant in…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as' above). A statute of Oregon required that reasonable safeguards be provided for set screws in all factories, mills, and shops where machinery is used. There was evidence in the case that the proximate cause of the death of the plaintiff in error’s intestate was an unguarded set screw on a revolving- shaft in a factory. Upon the question whether the defense of assumption of risk may be invoked against an employe who has notice of his master’s failure to perform a statutory duty for his protection, the decisions of the state courts are contradictory, and are nearly…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Hough v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Tuttle v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee RailwaySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Narramore v. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
- O'Maley v. South Boston Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Knisley v. . PrattNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hietala v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- McClaugherty v. Rogue River Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Schulte v. Pacific Paper Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Andrew F. Mahony Co. v. MarshallDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1931
- Breidenthal v. GroomsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.