Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 48
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DECISIONS ON MINES AND MINING.
not engaged in the employment, by reason of the alleged negligence
of the employer his right to recove damages exists under common-
law rules as if h relation of emp oyer and employee never at any
time exis ed.
Cox v. United States Coal & Coke Co. (West Virginia), 92 Southeastern 559, p. 5.
NEGLIGENCE OF OPERATOR.
PROOF OF NEG IGENCE-ADMISSION OF AGENT.
In an action by a laborer in a mine for damages for injuries caused by
a fall or rock from the roof of an entry, it is proper on the question of
negligence to prove instructions given by the mine fc reman where
they were given in advance of the accident and pertain to the duties
imposed by law upon the operator and imposed by the operator
upon the foreman and through him upon the timbermen and where
the instructions had a clear tendency to show negligence in that the
foreman and timbermen knowingly took the chance of a falling roof
which they could have readily avoided by the use of temporary
Ahlson v. High Bridge Coal Co. (Iowa), 163 Northwestern 219, p. 220.
SUFFICIENCY OF PROOF.
In an action for damages for injuries to a motorman, it was alleged
that the injuries were caused by a loose plank in the track being
thrust up through the bottom of the motor due to the alleged negli-
gence of the mine operator in permitting the plank in the track to
become and remain loose, and in so maintaining the motor that the
lower part thereof was open, through which extraneous objects might
pass and cause injury to the motorman. Proof that there was a
loose plank in the track at the place where the accident occurred, and
that the plank had been loose for 10 days or more prior to the acci-
dent is sufficient to sustain a verdict and special findings by the jury
to the effect that they did not know how the plank became loose or
how long it had been loose are not inconsistent with the general
verdict or insufficient to sustain it. It was the continuous duty of
the mine operator to exercise ordinary care to keep the planks and
the track in a reasonably safe condition so as not to cause an accident
to the motor resulting in an injury to the motorman.
Daly Judge Mining Co. v. Towey, 240 Fed. 658, p. 660.
A helper in a drilling crew composed of four persons was injured
while engaged in knocking down pipe. The work consisted in un-
screwing and separating into its original lengths the pipe taken from
an oil well. The pipe in the process of the work was lowered into a
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/m1/62/: accessed August 23, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.