Summary

Portrait of Joseph Rucker Lamar Joseph Rucker Lamar Toledo, St. Louis, & Western Railroad Company v…

Here the Ohio statute abolished the rule of the common law as to the assumption of risks in injuries occasioned by defects in tracks, while the Federal statute left that common-law rule in force, except in those instances where the injury was due to the defendant's violation of Federal statutes, which-like the hours-of-labor law and the safety-appliance act-were passed for the protection of interstate employees.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Joseph Rucker Lamar Joseph Rucker Lamar Toledo, St. Louis, & Western Railroad Company v…

There was evidence that the plaintiff had been employed by the company for about ten years,-for much of that time being in charge of the switching engine which operated over every part of the yard,-and that he was thoroughly familiar with the condition, situation, and location of the tracks at the point where the injury occurred. Neither the plaintiff's complaint nor the defendant's answer contained any reference to the employers' liability act.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature