Kasadarian v. James Hill Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 130 F. 62
• 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4793

Syllabus

<p>1. Master and Servant — Injuries to Servant — Pleading.</p> <p>Where the first four counts of a declaration charged that plaintiff, a helper engaged in assisting in changing the dies on a press, was injured by the fall of the plunger from an unknown cause, and such fall might have been due either to the negligence of a fellow servant in charge of the press or to some cause which could not reasonably have been anticipated and guarded against by the master, such counts did not state a cause of action.</p> <p>2. Same — Dutt of Servant.</p> <p>Where plaintiff, a mere laborer called on to exert his strength in changing a heavy die, part of a power press, was injured by the falling of the plunger, he was not necessarily, chargeable with the duty of a close inspection of the condition of the machinery near which he was set to work, but was entitled to assume that the person in immediate charge of the machine had properly performed his duty to make it safe before requiring plaintiff to work about it.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>Where a declaration in an action for injuries to a laborer directed to assist in changing heavy dies, part of a power press, charged negligence in the employment of an incompetent die setter, and alleged that such person negligently directed plaintiff to assist in changing the dies without taking proper precautions to prevent a fall of the plunger, and that the plunger,' from some unknown cause, fell and injured plaintiff, such allegations sufficiently stated a cause of action, since the competency of the die setter, and whether it was negligent to change the dies without effectually providing against the fall of the plunger, were for the jury.</p> <p>H 2.' See Master and Servant, vol. 34 Cent. Dig. §§ 713, 714</p>