Reusch v. Groetzinger

Decided May 24, 1899

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1899-05-24

Appeal, No. 92, Jan. T., 1899, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lancaster Co., Aug. T., 1896, No. 48, refusing to take off nonsuit. Trespass for personal injuries. Before Livingston, P. J. At the trial it appeared that the plaintiff was employed in the beam house of defendants’ tannery in Lancaster city. On the day of the accident there was occasion to move one of the large stone slabs or tables on which leather was dressed.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1944

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1899-05-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Pee Ctteiam,

¶1It is perfectly apparent from the testimony that the accident resulted from the manner in which one of the men handled his crowbar in the effort to move the large stone table. It slipped, from some cause, and as a consequence the table fell over and injured the plaintiff. It was an accident such as is likely to happen in the ordinary conduct of any business, and is one of the risks which is assumed by the workmen in taking such employment. There is no testimony in the case to show that the accident resulted from the negligence of the defendants.

¶2Judgment affirmed.