DeCamp v. Youngstown Municipal Railway Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
As the judgment was. reversed upon the sole ground that it was contrary to law, the only question confronting us here is whether the injuries were incurred in the coui-se of the plaintiff’s employment. If the accident occurred outside of the course of the plaintiff’s employment he was entitled to recover in this action. If the accident occurred within the course of plaintiff’s employment he is not entitled to recover in this action, but should have applied for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Gen. Code, Sections 1465-87 to 1465-108).
It is the general rule that if an employe…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Erie Railroad Company v. WinfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Donovan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Claim of Littler v. George A. Fuller Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Wabash Railway Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
- Lumbermen's Reciprocal Ass'n v. BehnkenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Fisher v. MayfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Sebek v. Cleveland Graphite Bronze Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1947
- Marlow v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1967
- Venho v. Ostrander Railway & Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1936
- City & County of San Francisco v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.