Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 40
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DECISIONS ON MINES AND MINING.
APPLICATION OF EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY ACT-NEGLIGENCE.
In an action under the Indiana employer's liability act (Acts 1911,
ch. 88), for damages for injuries to an employee in a mine, the provi-
sions of section 8580 (Burns 1914) requiring the mine operator to
inspect his mine and the miner to give notice of any defect discovered,
have no application to the action and the provisions of that section
can not apply where the defects complained of and relied upon as a
basis of recovery do not come within that section of the statute.
Otter Creek Coal Co. v. Archer (Indiana App.), 115 Northeastern 952, p. 953.
APPLICATION-NATURE OF INJURY.
A miner while occupied in the performance of his underground
duty and in the course of his employment in a copper mine opened
a valve to admit compressed fresh air into a compartment of the
mine for the purpose of clearing the working of foul air and per-
mitting the workmen to proceed with the mining. On opening the
valve the air escaping under heavy pressure struck the miner's face
and cast dirt or other substances into his eyes causing the injuries
complained of. In an action by the miner for damages no claim
was made on the ground of the negligence of the mine operator,
but a recovery was'-authorized and sustained on the ground that
the injury was the result of the dangers and hazards arising in the
course of the employment, within the Arizona workmen's compensa-
Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. v. Mendez (Arizona), 166 Pacific 278, p. 279.
APPLICATION TO EMPLOYER.
A coal-mining company that has elected to pay into the West
Virginia workmen's compensation fund the premiums provided
by the act, can not, in an action by an employee for damages for
injuries sustained through its negligence, escape liability for the
alleged negligence on the ground that it had elected to accept the
provisions of the workmen's compensation act and was only liable
according to its provisions, where the employee was not himself
within the provisions of the act because not injured in the course
of his employment.
Cox v. United States Coal & Coke Co. (West Virginia). 92 Southeastern 559, p. 561.
COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT-INJURY WHILE OFF DUTY.
A miner employed to work as a laborer in a mine was not prepared
to commence work on the day shift at the hour the shift began
work. Understanding that day laborers would not be admitted to
the mine after the time for beginning work, he later started some
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Thompson, Joseph Wesley. Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917, report, December 1917; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38745/m1/54/: accessed September 20, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.