TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Reier v. Detroit Steel & Spring Works

Reier v. Detroit Steel & Spring Works, 67 N.W. 120 (Mich. 1896)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 12, 1896
Judges
Grant, Hooker, Long, Montgomery, Moore
Citations
67 N.W. 120109 Mich. 2441896 Mich. LEXIS 835
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Master and Servant—Independent Contractor—Liability for Injuries to Employe. In an action for personal injuries based upon the relation of master and servant, there can be no recovery where the evidence shows that the plaintiff was not employed by defendant, but by a contractor, to whom defendant furnished the building and appliances about which the plaintiff was employed, and who paid, and had exclusive control of, the workmen.
Summary
Error to Wayne; Lillibridge, J. Case by August Reier, an infant, by Charles Reier, his next friend, against the Detroit Steel & Spring Works, for personal injuries. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Grant

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Grant, J.

Plaintiff, a boy 15 years old, was seriously injured by the bursting of an emery wheel, at which he was engaged in grinding the burrs off some coil springs. The court directed a verdict for the defendant. The declaration is based upon the existence of the relation of master and servant. It alleges that plaintiff was in defendant’s employ, and that it was guilty of negligence in placing him, inexperienced, at dangerous work, without warning or instruction; in not furnishing him with a safe machine to work upon, in that the journals upon which the wheels ran were worn, so that they jumped and wobbled ; that the wheel itself was out of condition, worn out, and needed turning; that it was not provided with *245 blowers, and did not have a. wire web for strengthening it.

The instruction of the court was correct. Plaintiff was not in the employ of the defendant, but in the employ of a contractor, to whom the defendant furnished the building, tools, and machinery with which to perform the work contracted. The contractor employed and paid all his workmen, including the plaintiff, and had the sole control and direction over them. If it was negligence to set the plaintiff at this work, about which we express no opinion, the contractor alone was at fault. Plaintiff testified that he was employed and paid by the contractor, and was not employed by the company.

The defendant, upon a proper declaration, could be held liable only for failure to furnish suitable machinery, and to keep it in proper repair, provided it was its duty to do so, upon sufficient notice. The emery wheel was one of the kind in common use, and new. There was no evidence to show that the machinery and appliances were not in good condition, and safe, when furnished.- The defendant is not responsible for their negligent use, or for the rate of speed at which the wheel was running.

The judgment is affirmed.

Montgomery, Hooker, and Moore, JJ., concurred. Long, C. J., did not sit.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1897: 11901: 11912: 118972026peak 1897 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. McBride v. Jerry Madden Shingle Co.138 N.W. 1077 (Mich. 1912)
  2. Indiana Iron Co. v. Cray48 N.E. 803 (Ind. Ct. App. 1897)
  3. Nyback v. Champagne Lumber Co.109 F. 732 (7th Cir. 1901)

Most recent

  1. McBride v. Jerry Madden Shingle Co.138 N.W. 1077 (Mich. 1912)
  2. Nyback v. Champagne Lumber Co.109 F. 732 (7th Cir. 1901)
  3. Indiana Iron Co. v. Cray48 N.E. 803 (Ind. Ct. App. 1897)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list