Walsh v. Continental Iron Works

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Walsh v. Continental Iron Works

124 A.D. 895, 108 N.Y.S. 1149

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 124 A.D. 895 (Walsh v. Continental Iron Works) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walsh v. Continental Iron Works, 124 A.D. 895, 108 N.Y.S. 1149 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Gaynor, J. (dissenting):

A trench six feet in depth which the plaintiff and other workmen were just finishing the digging of caved in and hurt the plain[896]*896tiff. ■ The dismissal'of the complaint at the. close of all the evidence was error. No sheathing was furnished to the workmen and the trench was not sheathed up. It was for the jury to say whether this was not neglect of duty by the defendant to its workmen. If the trench were nine or twelve feet deep we would have no question Of this, nor will we when we pause to think how deep six feet is. Only a very few men reach that height. (Farrell v. City of Middletown, 172 N. Y. 666; Reilly v. Troy Brick Co., 184 id. 399). In such dangérous employments the' master owes his men intelligent, and sometimes scientific, oversight, care and direction. Whether - the plaintiff acquiesced in the risk was a question of fact. The judgment should be reversed. Hooker,- J., concurred.

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

Gaynor, J. (dissenting):

A trench six feet in depth which the plaintiff and other workmen were just finishing the digging of caved in and hurt the plain[896]*896tiff. ■ The dismissal'of the complaint at the. close of all the evidence was error. No sheathing was furnished to the workmen and the trench was not sheathed up. It was for the jury to say whether this was not neglect of duty by the defendant to its workmen. If the trench were nine or twelve feet deep we would have no question Of this, nor will we when we pause to think how deep six feet is. Only a very few men reach that height. (Farrell v. City of Middletown, 172 N. Y. 666; Reilly v. Troy Brick Co., 184 id. 399). In such dangérous employments the' master owes his men intelligent, and sometimes scientific, oversight, care and direction. Whether - the plaintiff acquiesced in the risk was a question of fact. The judgment should be reversed. Hooker,- J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D. 895, 108 N.Y.S. 1149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walsh-v-continental-iron-works-nyappdiv-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack