Mulligan v. Crimmins
Mulligan v. Crimmins
27 N.Y.S. 819; 75 Hun 578; 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 578; 58 N.Y. St. Rep. 737
(New York Supplement)
Opinion of the Court
There are cases where the accident raises the presumption of negligence, but we do not think the present such a one. We are not able to say that a spicula would not be dislodged from a chisel by the blow of a heavy sledge when the chisel was in good order. There was no proof that the condition of the chisel, before the blow was struck, was a dangerous one; still less, that a reasonable examination would have disclosed danger. We are therefore of opinion that plaintiff failed to prove negligence on the part of defendant. Judgment for defendant.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.