The Pennsylvania Rd. Co. v. Malsek

163 N.E. 302, 118 Ohio St. 644, 118 Ohio St. (N.S.) 644, 1928 Ohio LEXIS 331
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 28, 1928
Docket20545
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 163 N.E. 302 (The Pennsylvania Rd. Co. v. Malsek) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
The Pennsylvania Rd. Co. v. Malsek, 163 N.E. 302, 118 Ohio St. 644, 118 Ohio St. (N.S.) 644, 1928 Ohio LEXIS 331 (Ohio 1928).

Opinion

It is ordered and adjudged by this Court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby affirmed, for the reason that a majority of the court are of opinion that the matter is controlled by the principle of the cases where the master, or one in authority over the servant, peremptorily orders him to do a particular work, apparently dangerous, yet such as a reasonably prudent person, acting under the influence or restraint of such an order, might in obedience thereto properly undertake to perform. The question whether a man of ordinary care and prudence, under such circumstances, would have proceeded with the work is one of fact for the jury, under proper instructions from the trial court, and the Court of Appeals was right in holding that the same should have been submitted to the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

Marshall, C. J., Day, Allen and Robinson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Leonidas v. Great Northern Railway Co.
72 P.2d 1007 (Montana Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 N.E. 302, 118 Ohio St. 644, 118 Ohio St. (N.S.) 644, 1928 Ohio LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-pennsylvania-rd-co-v-malsek-ohio-1928.