Laidlow v. Hariton MacH. Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that employer had “deliberately” and “systematically deceived OSHA” for over thirteen years “into believing that [a] machine was [safe]”
• noting that machines that require an employee to manually feed material into a nip point pose a great risk of injury
• noting that the \mere toleration of workplace hazards 'will come up short' of substantial certainty\
• finding error in granting employer’s motion for summary judgment because discovery was not complete
• addressing the intentional wrong exception to the Workers’ Compensation Act’s exclusive remedy, as set forth in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8
• describing N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 as the \exclusive remedy provision of the\ WCA and \the Worker's Compensation bar\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).