Crowley v. Pacific Mills
Decision Date | 02 January 1889 |
Citation | 19 N.E. 344,148 Mass. 228 |
Parties | CROWLEY v. PACIFIC MILLS. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
J.P. Sweeney, for plaintiff.
E.T. Burley and C.U. Bell, for defendant.
The plaintiff's injury was received, according to his own testimony, in consequence of his putting his finger in between the roll and the cylinder, in order to smooth the cloth, just before it passed upon the cylinder, by taking out a "double edge," as it was called, that being a term applied to the turning over or under of the edge of the cloth. The plaintiff was seventeen years old, and had been at work for about six months upon a machine substantially like that upon which he received the injury, except that the distance between the roll and the cylinder was less upon the latter machine; and he had been at work upon the latter machine nearly two weeks. The operation of the machine was simple. In view of the plaintiff's age and experience prior to the time of the accident, no duty then rested on the defendant to give him instruction in reference to the risk of possible injury. It could not be deemed necessary at that time to tell him that, if he should put his hand in between the cloth and the revolving cylinder, just at or just before the place where the cloth came in contact with the cylinder, there was danger that his hand would be caught. The omission to do this did not constitute negligence on the part of the defendant. Goodnow v. Walpole Emery Mills, 146 Mass. 261, 267, 15 N.E. 576; Ciriack v. Woolen Co., 146 Mass. 182, 15 N.E. 579.
Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fayetteville Mercantile Co. v. Rogers
...with the truck. Certainly, at his age and experience a warning was not necessary. 107 Wis. 216; 90 Wis. 113; 62 N.W. 624; 21 N.E. 117; 19 N.E. 344; 32 N.E. 39 Ark. 17-37; 56 Ark. 206; 82 Ark. 534; 93 Ark. 153; 15 Am. Neg. Rep. 192; 2 Id. 498; 64 N.E. 476; 52 A. 348; 174 F. 644; 187 F. 389; ......
-
Forquer v. Slater Brick Co.
... ... make of a reliable manufacturing establishment; that all pug ... mills are built in the same way with the knives exposed; that ... this one was appropriate for the work ... Merchants' Woolen ... Co., 146 Mass. 182, 15 N.E. 579, 4 Am. St. Rep. 307; ... Crowley v. Pacific Mills, 148 Mass. 228, 19 N.E ... 344; Williams v. Churchill, 137 Mass. 243, 50 Am ... ...
-
Gazette Printing & Publishing Co. v. Suits
... ... [26 ... Ariz. 470] "(10) All work in mills, shops, works, yards, ... plants and factories where steam, electricity, or any other ... are many cases to the same effect, amongst which are the ... following: Crowley v. Pacific Mills, 148 ... Mass. 228, 19 N.E. 344; De Souza v. Stafford ... Mills, 155 ... ...
-
Groth v. Thomann
...Ill. App. 56;Connolly v. Eldredge, 160 Mass. 566, 36 N. E. 469;Coullard v. Tecumseh Mills, 151 Mass. 85, 23 N. E. 731;Crowley v. Pacific Mills, 148 Mass. 228, 19 N. E. 344;Pratt v. Prouty, 153 Mass. 333, 26 N. E. 1002;De Souza v. Stafford Mills, 155 Mass. 476, 30 N. E. 81. Why the claim of ......