Wholeben v. Warren Mica Lubricant Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Wholeben v. Warren Mica Lubricant Co.

52 A. 203, 203 Pa. 234, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 695

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 4, 1902

DocketAppeal, No. 5

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A. 203 (Wholeben v. Warren Mica Lubricant 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

Wholeben v. Warren Mica Lubricant Co., 52 A. 203, 203 Pa. 234, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 695 (Pa. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This case turned entirely upon disputed questions of fact. The plaintiff alleged that the machinery was not properly secured, and that while attempting, under specific instructions, to remove a belt from a main shaft, the countershaft gave way, and his hand was drawn in between the belt and pulley and injured.

The defendant compaiw denied giving any directions to throw off the belt by hand, and the evidence on its part tended to show that the countershaft was secured in the usual way, and that a mechanical clutch was provided for stopping part of the machinery, to permit of changing the belt in safety.

These controverted questions were submitted to the jury, and the verdict was in favor of the defendant. The charge of the court below was clear and ample, and presented every element of the plaintiff’s claim upon which he could properly rely. The assignments of error are overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

This case turned entirely upon disputed questions of fact. The plaintiff alleged that the machinery was not properly secured, and that while attempting, under specific instructions, to remove a belt from a main shaft, the countershaft gave way, and his hand was drawn in between the belt and pulley and injured.

The defendant compaiw denied giving any directions to throw off the belt by hand, and the evidence on its part tended to show that the countershaft was secured in the usual way, and that a mechanical clutch was provided for stopping part of the machinery, to permit of changing the belt in safety.

These controverted questions were submitted to the jury, and the verdict was in favor of the defendant. The charge of the court below was clear and ample, and presented every element of the plaintiff’s claim upon which he could properly rely. The assignments of error are overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A. 203, 203 Pa. 234, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wholeben-v-warren-mica-lubricant-co-pa-1902.