C. Crane & Co. v. Sesher

Sixth Circuit

C. Crane & Co. v. Sesher

172 F. 1022, 96 C.C.A. 665, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5047

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedOctober 25, 1909

DocketNo. 1,939

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 F. 1022 (C. Crane & Co. v. Sesher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

C. Crane & Co. v. Sesher, 172 F. 1022, 96 C.C.A. 665, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5047 (6th Cir. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The facts in this case are identical with those in the case of Noble v. Crane & Co. (decided by this court at the June session) 1G9 Fed. 55, where we affirmed an instruction for the defendant company. It was error in the court below to deny the request by plaintiff in error for a similar instruction ; Noble and Sesher having been hurt by the fall of the same scaffold at the same time. Reversed, and remanded for new trial.

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

PER CURIAM.

The facts in this case are identical with those in the case of Noble v. Crane & Co. (decided by this court at the June session) 1G9 Fed. 55, where we affirmed an instruction for the defendant company. It was error in the court below to deny the request by plaintiff in error for a similar instruction ; Noble and Sesher having been hurt by the fall of the same scaffold at the same time. Reversed, and remanded for new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 F. 1022, 96 C.C.A. 665, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-crane-co-v-sesher-ca6-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack