Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 47
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
MINES AND MINING OPERATIONS.
RELATION OF MASTER AND SERVANT.
PROOF-OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY AS EVIDENCE.
In an action by a miner for damages for injuries received while
working in a mine due to the alleged negligence of the mine operator,
where the coal-mine company denies it was operating the mine at
the time of the injury, evidence is admissible to show that the personal
property used in operating the mine was listed for assessment and
taxation in the name of the mining corporation for the year within
which the miner was injured and for some years previous and subse-
quent thereto, and that the listing of the property was made by
officials and agents with authority to make returns of its property
to the assessor.
Ward v. Liverpool Salt & Coal Co. (West Virginia), 92 Southeastern 92, p. 96.
MINER RIDING OUT OF MINE AFTER WORK.
The relation of master and servant exists between a coal-mine
operator and a miner or employee after the miner has finished his
day's work and is riding out of the mine on a trip of cars with the
knowledge and consent or acquiescence of the mine operator. The
duty of the mine operator to the miner while so riding on a trip is
equal to his duty to his motorman so far as it relates to the safe
condition of the cars and tracks and if any violation of this duty
results in an injury to the miner, the mine operator will be liable in
Simpson v. Carter Coal Co. (West Virginia), 91 Southeastern 1085, p. 1086.
LIABILITY IN ABSENCE OF RELATION.
The ru e requiring the existence of the relation of master and
servant in order to make the master liable to th , servant for an injury
sustained, due to the negligence of the alleged master, is not without
its exceptions. There are circumstances and conditions under which
a person not actually the master or employer may be held liable as if
he were in fact the employer.
Ward v. Liverpool Salt & Coal Co. (West Virginia), 92 Southeastern 92, p. 94.
INJURY OUTSIDE OF EMPLOYMENT.
The West Virginia workmen's compensation act has no application
either to the emp'oyer or the employee where the latter is injured while
not engaged in hi; employment. Where an employee is injured while
Here’s what’s next.
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
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/m1/61/: accessed April 30, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.