Appeal, No. 265 | Pa. | May 13, 1907

Per Curiam,

Whether the absence of a guard was negligence in the de*204fendant, or whether it was the proximate cause of the injury, need not be discussed. The plaintiff’s action in attempting to clean the rolls while they were in motion was an unnecessary and voluntary exposure to manifest danger, for the consequences of which his own negligence is alone responsible.

Judgment is affirmed.

© 2024 Midpage AI does not provide legal advice. By using midpage, you consent to our Terms and Conditions.