McIntyre v. Hamilton
Citations
- 57 Pa. Super. 74
- 1914 Pa. Super. LEXIS 152
Syllabus
<p>Negligence — Pollution of stream — Personal injuries — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. In an aetiou by an employee of a bridge contractor against the proprietors of a paper mill to recover damages for personal injuries, the case is for the jury where the evidence tends to show that the plaintiff at the time the injuries were sustained was working in a shallow stream below the defendants’ mill; that acids had escaped from the mill, and came in contact and burnt the plaintiff’s person; and that although boots were provided for plaintiff he had no information of any danger, other than that from wet feet, if he failed to use them.</p> <p>2. In such a case evidence as to the quality of the water in the stream is admissible although referring to other occasions than the one on which the plaintiff was injured, if it appears that the defendants testified that no liquid of any kind of a harmful character was discharged from the mill into the stream.</p>
Judges: Head, Henderson, Orlady, Porter, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.