Abstracts of Current Decisions on Mines and Mining: May to August, 1917 Page: 66
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
DECISIONS ON MINES AND MINING.
the motor, and he knew that the same lump of coal had been there
for two or three weeks before the accident. Under such circum-
stances he voluntarily assumed the risk of any injury arising from
contact with the coal.
Vilsock v. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. (Pennsylvania), 100 Atlantic 530, p. 532.
DANGERS THREATENING IMMEDIATE INJURY.
An employee assumes the risk where the dangers are of such a char-
acter as to a man in the exercise of average care and precaution sim-
ilarly situated would appear to threaten immediate injury to the
Dimmick v. Utah Fuel Co. (Utah), 164 Pacific 872, p. 875.
RIDING ON MOVING MOTOR-DANGER OBVIOUS.
A brakeman or snapper employed by a coal-mine operator whose
duties consisted in operating the brakes on the coal cars and in
coupling and uncoupling the coal cars and in throwing the switch
for the motor, loaded and empty cars. He had no occasion to ride
upon the motor, as his place was near the rear of the train, and it
was his business to walk the short distance from where the cars were
coupled and uncoupled to the switch near the pit mouth. There was a
safe place on the rear of the motor on which he could ride, but, instead
of walking or taking the safe place on the motor, he was in the habit
of jumping upon the side of the moving motor with his foot upon the
brake rod and riding in that position the short distance to the switch.
There was danger of his foot slipping from the rod and going under the
wheels, and, as the rod was near the ground, there was danger of
striking an obstruction or lumps of coal that lay near the track.
The evidence of the superintendent, the mine foreman, machinist,
boss motorman, and other witnesses was that the brakeman was
warned against the risk which he incurred in attempting to jump
upon the side of the moving motor. But under such circumstances
it was not necessary to warn him, as his employment as a snapper
for months prior to the accident must have given him a full under-
standing of the situation. The danger incident to jumping on the
side of the moving motor was obvious, and the possible result of a
misstep or a slip of the foot from the brake rod situated so near the
wheels was one which a person of his age and intelligence was bound
Vilsock v. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. (Pennsylvania), 100 Atlantic 530, p. 531.
MINER ENLARGING ENTRY.
An experienced miner employed by a coal-mine operator to broaden
an entry in the mine for the laying of an additional track assumes
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/m1/80/: accessed January 17, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.