Mutual Implement & Hardware Ins. v. Pittman
Mississippi Supreme Court
1DissentRoberds, J.
We have crossed the Rubicon. The Court has now held that every employer, who is within the Workmen’s Compensation Act, is liable for every injury inflicted by one employee on a co-employee while working together at the place of work, even though the injury results from personal malice on the part of the wrongdoer towards the injured employee. There is no claim here that the injury arose out of the employment other than in the sense that both were employed and were working at, or about, the same place. In other words, every employer is the guarantor against eccentricities, habits, temperament,…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- McNicol's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Matter of Leonbruno v. . Champlain Silk MillsNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Harden v. Thomasville Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Claim of Verschleiser v. Joseph Stern & SonNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Maguire v. James Lees & Sons Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.