DeGrazia v. Piccardo

Citations

• 15 Pa. Super. 107
• 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 311

Syllabus

<p>Master and servant — Risk of employment.</p> <p>An employee by contracting for the performance of hazardous’ duties, assumes such risks as are incident to their discharge from causes open and obvious, the dangerous character of which causes he has had opportunity to ascertain. On the other hand, where there are special risks in an employment of which the employee is not, from the nature of the employment, cognizant, or which are not patent in the work, it is the duty of the employer specially to notify him of such risks, and on failure of such notice, if he is hurt by exposure to such risks, he is entitled to recover from the employer in all cases where the employer either was cognizant or ought to have been cognizant of the risks.</p> <p>Employer's liability — Defective appliance — Question for jury — Risk of business.</p> <p>Plaintiff's hand was caught in rolls of machine, a risk incident to his employment. There was some evidence of negligence on the part of the employer in maintaining an insufficient and unsafe appliance for the stopping of the machine in the event of the occurring of such accident, which it was the duty of the defendant to know might occur. Held, that it was for the jury to determine the dividing line as to the damage resulting from defendant’s negligence. The difficulty of separating the damage from each cause may be great, but it does not change the nature of the tortious act of the defendant or relieve him from liability.</p>