Andriuszis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.

149 A.D. 924, 133 N.Y.S. 1111

This text of 149 A.D. 924 (Andriuszis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Andriuszis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co., 149 A.D. 924, 133 N.Y.S. 1111 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the authority of Andriuszis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co. (143 App. Div. 607). Jenks, P. J., Burr, Woodward and Rich, JJ., concurred. Burr, J., also concurred upon the further grounds (1) that if Shukavage did employ the method of removing the tamping from the first hole, a verdict based upon the finding that after such tamping had been removed and the hole recharged such method would not be equally effective with the other method of drilling a second hole, so far as exploding the charge in the first hole is concerned, is against the weight of the evidence; (3) that defendant is not liable for the negligence of Shukavage, if any, under the statutes of Pennsylvania as construed by the Supreme Court of that State. (D'Jorko v. Berwind- White Coal Mining Co., 231 Penn. St. 164.) Hirschberg, J., dissented.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Andriuszis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.
143 A.D. 607 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
149 A.D. 924, 133 N.Y.S. 1111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andriuszis-v-philadelphia-reading-coal-iron-co-nyappdiv-1912.