Eddington v. Union Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Eddington v. Union Railway Co.

109 N.Y.S. 819

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 10, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 109 N.Y.S. 819 (Eddington v. Union Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Eddington v. Union Railway Co., 109 N.Y.S. 819 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff was handed a chain by defendant’s master mechanic, with instructions to use it in taking out an armature.. While engaged in the performance of that work the chain broke, and plaintiff was injured. The chain was defective, and the evidence was sufficient to charge the defendant with notice of the defect. Two of his,fingers were fractured, one being permanently injured, and he was unable to work for six months. Defendant offered no testimony, and denied receiving notice under Employer’s Liability Act, Laws 1902, p. 1748, c. 600. The notice was proper in form, and proof of due service by mail was uncontradicted.

Order setting aside the verdict reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and judgment reinstated, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff was handed a chain by defendant’s master mechanic, with instructions to use it in taking out an armature.. While engaged in the performance of that work the chain broke, and plaintiff was injured. The chain was defective, and the evidence was sufficient to charge the defendant with notice of the defect. Two of his,fingers were fractured, one being permanently injured, and he was unable to work for six months. Defendant offered no testimony, and denied receiving notice under Employer’s Liability Act, Laws 1902, p. 1748, c. 600. The notice was proper in form, and proof of due service by mail was uncontradicted.

Order setting aside the verdict reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and judgment reinstated, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 N.Y.S. 819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eddington-v-union-railway-co-nyappterm-1908.