Legal Opinion

Engfors v. Nelson Steamship Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 1929PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, C. J.

Parties to the appeal agree that the case must be decided in accordance with the seamen’s act, March 4, 1915, ch. 153, § 20, 38 Stat. 1185; June 5, 1920, ch. 250, § 33, 41 Stat. 1007 (46 U. S. C. A. 688). Under those acts the defense of the assumption of risk has been abolished in all cases where the employer had violated the terms of said acts “except as specified in § 4 of the Federal Employers ’ Liability Act, the employe assumes the ordinary risks of his employment and, when obvious or fully known and appreciated, the extraordinary risks and those due to negligence of his employer and…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. Boldt v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  4. Panama R. v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
  5. Cricket S. S. Co. v. ParryCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wychgel v. States Steamship Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Christie v. Great Northern Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1933
  3. MacOmber v. De Bardeleben Coal Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1942
  4. Istre v. Diamond M. Drilling CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1969
  5. Ziegler v. Alaska Portland Packers' Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1930

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API