Prenate v. Union Iron Co.
This text of 30 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 528 (Prenate v. Union Iron Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Yerdict set aside and new trial ordered, costs to abide event. Held, that the court erred in refusing to charge that if the plaintiff knew, when using the machine, that because of the defect in the roller-stand, it was dangerous, and if the injury resulted from such defect, the plaintiff could not recover.
[529]*529It was also error to refuse to charge that the promise of the superintendent to repair the roller, if made as claimed, did not relieve the plaintiff from the charge of contributory negligence in the use of the roller, if the plaintiff knew that the promise had not been kept and that the machine remained unsafe
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
30 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prenate-v-union-iron-co-nysupct-1881.