Case ID: ri_21/html/0189-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bridget Eagan, Administratrix, vs. Maguire & Penniman.
    PROVIDENCE
    FEBRUARY 10, 1899.
    Present : Matteson, C. J., Stiness and Tillinghast, JJ.
    (1) Negligence. Suitable Appliances. Work of Ordinary Calling on Sunday. Proximate Cause.
    
    Engaging in labor of bis ordinary calling by an employee on Sunday does not constitute a defence to an action for injuries resulting- from tlie employer’s negligence in not providing suitable appliances for tlie employment ; such labor not being the immediate and proximate cause of the accident.
    Trespass on the Case for negligence of defendants in not providing suitable appliances for the use of their employees, whereby plaintiff’s intestate received fatal injuries. After verdict for the plaintiff, heard on defendants’ petition for a new trial.
   Per Curiam.

The first exception in the petition was not pressed.

John W. Hogan, for plaintiff.

James M. Ripley and John Henshaw, for defendants.

We think the second exception must be overruled. The fact that the plaintiff’s intestate was engaged in the work of his ordinary calling at the time of the accident, and that it was on Sunday, do not constitute a defence to the action, since the labor on Sunday was not the immediate and proximate cause of the accident. Baldwin v. Barney, 12 R. I. 892.

Petition for new trial denied and dismissed, and case remitted to the Common Pleas Division with direction to enter judgment upon the verdict.