Texas Pipe Line Company v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
(after stating the facts). It is first earnestly contended by counsel for the defendant that the undisputed evidence shows that the plaintiff assumed the risk, and that the court erred in not instructing a verdict in favor of the defendant.
It is true, as contended bj7- counsel, that it has been uniformly held by this court that when a servant knows the method adopted for his work, the place which is furnished and the appliances with which the work is done, he assumes the ordinary risk of injury which may result from such known’ methods and appliances. Our holdings are equally uniform…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co v. GrubbsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Great Western Land Co. v. BarkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- L. J. Smith Construction Co. v. TateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. CatheySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
3Cited by16 opinions
- Duncan v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
- Covington v. Little Fay Oil Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Jennings v. American President Lines, Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1943
- Blanton v. Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
- Newark Gravel Co. v. BarberSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.