Case Name: NEUWEILER v. CENTRAL BREWING CO. OF NEW YORK
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1907-04-19
Citations: 103 N.Y.S. 1136
Docket Number: 
Parties: NEUWEILER v. CENTRAL BREWING CO. OF NEW YORK.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 103
Pages: 1136–1136

Head Matter:
NEUWEILER v. CENTRAL BREWING CO. OF NEW YORK.
(Supreme Court Appellate Division, Second Department.
April 19, 1907.)
Appeal from Trial Term, Kings County. Action by Frederick W. Neuweiler against the Central Brewing Company of New York. From a judg~ent in favor of plaintiff on a verdict, defendant appeals. Affirmed. William A. Jones, Jr., for appellant. Michael J. Scanlon, for respondent.

Opinion:
GAYNOR, J.
While the plaintiff was planing 1~arrel staves on a steam planing machine one of them drew his hand into the planing knives by a sudden jerk. The knives came up through the table. The questions submitted to. the jury were whether the knives should have been guarded, except the space necessary for the board to go through, and, if so, whether the plaintiff had assumed the risk caused by the absence of such a guard. There was evidence that the guard was practicable and in use. Section 81 of the labor law (Laws 1897, p. 480, c. 415) requires that certain machinery, including "planers," shall be properly guarded; and section 3, c. 000, p. 1750, of the Laws of 1902 (commonly called the "Employer's Liability Act"), makes the question of the assumption of rink caused by the absence of such guard one of fact. The jury and the learned trial judge seem to have correctly decided the case. The judgment and order should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.