Korander

Korander v. Penn Bridge Co.

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 249·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 146·116 P. 384
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 11, 1911Civ. No. 976.California1,134 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained as a result of defendant’s negligence.

At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, defendant moved for a nonsuit, which motion the court granted. Judgment went accordingly, from which plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.

The complaint contains two counts, the cause of action in one of which (and the only one necessary to here consider) is based upon the alleged negligence of an engineer engaged in operating a steam hoisting engine supplying motive power in operating a pile-driver upon which plaintiff was employed. The evidence disclosed by the record clearly tends to show negligence on the part of the engineer; indeed, such fact is not controverted by respondent. The question, then, presented is whether or not this negligence of the engineer can be imputed to the defendant, his employer. By section 1970, Civil Code, it is provided that an employer shall be required to indemnify his employee for losses suffered by the latter through injuries resulting “from the wrongful act, neglect or default of a coemployee . . . employed upon a machine, . . . or other appliance than that upon which the employee is injured is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.