Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]

Ives v. South Buffalo Railway Co. | 94 N.E. 431 (1911)

The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw the rise of concern for persons injured, disabled, or killed on the job. State and local entities experimented with ways to protect or compensate injured workers. But those schemes often encountered resistance from courts suspicious of that kind of regulatory expansion. In Ives versus South Buffalo Railway Company, the New York Court of Appeals demonstrated its skepticism of an early form of workers' compensation.

New York’s legislature passed a statute providing that any employee injured while carrying out a hazardous occupation could sue his employer to recover damages, regardless of fault. The statute listed or defined several occupations or fields considered hazardous. The list included railroad workers.

Earl Ives was injured while working for the South Buffalo Railway. Ives then sued the railway for lost wages pursuant to the statute. The railway argued that the statute was unconstitutional, but the trial court rejected that argument and entered judgment for Ives. The Appellate Division affirmed, and the railway appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]

The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]

Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]

Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]

Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]

#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

свернуть