Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ellwood Consolidated Water Co. v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 2, 1970No. 17966Published

1DissentStahl, Circuit Judge

This troublesome case presents the difficult question of whether a contractual provision, otherwise controlling between the parties, is unenforceable, because it is contrary to public policy. The district court so held and I believe we should affirm. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.

By the Act of May 18, 1937, P.L. 654, as amended, 43 P.S. 25-1 et seq., the Pennsylvania legislature required that all places or “establishments” within the state where persons work must meet certain minimum standards of safety. The intention of the act clearly was to protect workingmen by requiring safe…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dilks v. Flohr ChevroletSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Boyd v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  3. Gilpin v. AbrahamDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API