(Download) "Beggelman v. Romanow" by Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Beggelman v. Romanow
- Author : Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
- Release Date : January 20, 1934
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
FIELD, Justice. This is an action of tort brought in the municipal court, by writ dated August 12, 1931, to recover compensation for personal injuries received by the plaintiff while employed by the defendant. The first count of the declaration alleged a defect in machinery due to the negligence of the defendant or of a person in his service entrusted with the duty of maintaining it in proper condition, and the second alleged negligence of the defendant or of a person entrusted with and exercising superintendence. There was a finding for the plaintiff on the first count and a report to the appellate division which was dismissed. The defendant was engaged in the rag business. He was not insured under the Workmen's Compensation Law. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 152. There was evidence that the plaintiff was injured, on June 5, 1931, while operating a press in baling felt, by reason of a handle of the press flying up and carrying the plaintiff with it and causing him to fall to the floor. It could have been found on contradictory evidence that the handle was defective in that it had been cracked and wired together, and that, because of the wiring, 'cogs' intended to hold the handle when it was pushed down would not do so. The plaintiff testified he was working for the defendant at $12 a week, that he 'had baled on and off for twenty-five years,' that he 'knew felt was a springy substance,' that for three months 'the handle of the press had been in the condition it was at the time of the accident,' that he had told the defendant to fix the handle and the defendant had said that he would do so later, 'that * * * [the defendant] just told him to bale and that is all * * * [the defendant] said to him.' The defendant testified that the plaintiff had worked thirty-five or forty days on the job. There was no evidence that the handle of the press was in any different condition at the time the plaintiff entered the defendant's employment from that at the time of the accident. There was no evidence that the plaintiff, or any person in his behalf, gave the defendant a written notice 'of the time, place and cause of the injury' other than a copy of the letter from the plaintiff's attorney to the defendant, dated August 6, 1931, which was not within sixty days after the accident causing the injury, and no evidence that it was impossible for the plaintiff, by reason of physical or mental incapacity, to give such notice. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 153, § 6.
 "Beggelman v. Romanow" by Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}