Laubach v. Coplay Cement Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Laubach v. Coplay Cement Manufacturing Co.

66 A. 566, 217 Pa. 361, 1907 Pa. LEXIS 717

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 1, 1907

DocketAppeal, No. 195

StatusPublished

This text of 66 A. 566 (Laubach v. Coplay Cement Manufacturing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Laubach v. Coplay Cement Manufacturing Co., 66 A. 566, 217 Pa. 361, 1907 Pa. LEXIS 717 (Pa. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff was struck and injured by a piece of timber forming one of the braces or crosspieces at the top of a derrick, which, was knocked off by collision with.a' bucket of stone raised from the quarry by a steam hoist. The negligence relied on by plaintiff was, first, that the derrick was defective in regard to its strength for such heavy work as it was called upon to do; and, secondly, that the steam hoist was allowed to be operated on this occasion by a boy of eighteen who was only a learner still under instruction in the management of the engine, and who by lack of proper experience and skill ran the bucket loaded with stone, at such speed that it struck the crosspieces and caused the accident. As there was testimony on both these points the court could not have taken the case from the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff was struck and injured by a piece of timber forming one of the braces or crosspieces at the top of a derrick, which, was knocked off by collision with.a' bucket of stone raised from the quarry by a steam hoist. The negligence relied on by plaintiff was, first, that the derrick was defective in regard to its strength for such heavy work as it was called upon to do; and, secondly, that the steam hoist was allowed to be operated on this occasion by a boy of eighteen who was only a learner still under instruction in the management of the engine, and who by lack of proper experience and skill ran the bucket loaded with stone, at such speed that it struck the crosspieces and caused the accident. As there was testimony on both these points the court could not have taken the case from the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 A. 566, 217 Pa. 361, 1907 Pa. LEXIS 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laubach-v-coplay-cement-manufacturing-co-pa-1907.