Dissent
p. 884Mary Geary, an Infant, by James Geary, Her Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. Persian Rug Manufactory, Appellant.
Headnote
Appeal from a judgment entered in the Mew York county clerk’s office on the 1st day of June, 1911, upon the verdict of a jury, and from an order entered on-the 6th day of June, 1911, denying a motion for a new trial. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Mo opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J. (dissenting), McLaughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.(dissenting): I dissent upon the ground that the last instruction to the jury on the subject of negligence,; charging the plaintiff’s first and second requests, left out -the provision -of the statute[1] which requires that the person for. whose negligence the defendant shall he responsible must be a person in the .service of the employer intrusted with and exercising superintendence, whose sole or-principal duty is that of superintendence; that this was error, to which the defendant excepted; and for this reason I think there should be a new trial.
* See Laws of 1902, chap. 600; now Labor Law (Consol. Laws, chap. 31, Laws of 1909, chap. 36), art. 14, as amd.— [Rep. .