Penner v. Vinton Co.

104 N.W. 385, 141 Mich. 77, 1905 Mich. LEXIS 750
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 21, 1905
DocketDocket No. 24
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 104 N.W. 385 (Penner v. Vinton Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Penner v. Vinton Co., 104 N.W. 385, 141 Mich. 77, 1905 Mich. LEXIS 750 (Mich. 1905).

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). The instruction was correct, because:

1. The negligence which caused the plaintiff’s injury, if any, was that of an employe of Mr. Fisher, over whom the defendant had no control. The wall was not being torn down, but being built up. Defendant is not chargeable with negligence that any of these bricklayers might commit in throwing or dropping a brick from the building.

2. The doctrine of a safe place has no application here. The place was safe, and was only made unsafe by the negligent act of a third party, for which the defendant was not responsible.

Judgment affirmed.

Moore, C. J., and Carpenter, Montgomery, and Ostrander, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Atkinson v. Corriher Mills Co.
158 S.E. 554 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Lindgren v. William Bros Boiler Manufacturing Co.
127 N.W. 626 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1910)
Pierson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.
170 F. 271 (Eighth Circuit, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
104 N.W. 385, 141 Mich. 77, 1905 Mich. LEXIS 750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/penner-v-vinton-co-mich-1905.