Brown v. Pacific Coast Coal Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. The facts, which involve the validity of a judgment of the Circuit of Appeals in an action for personal injuries, and the duty of the Federal court to follow the applicable decisions of the state court in such cases, are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is an action for personal injuries caused to the petitioner, the plaintiff, a miner, by an explosion of gas in a coal mine, in consequence, it is alleged, of the defendant’s neglect of its duty so to ventilate the mine as to make an explosion impossible. The trial judge left to the jury questions of the. plaintiff’s contributory negligence or assumption of risk, but instructed them that the law required th,e defendant to provide a sufficient amount of ventilation; that the duty of the inspection, prevention and removal of any accumulation of gas was a personal duty of the defendant that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pacific Coast Coal Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914
- Pacific Coast Coal Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914
3Cited by3 opinions
- Odegard v. General Casualty & Surety Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
- Hollingsworth v. . Supreme CouncilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Hollingsworth v. Supreme Council of Royal ArcanumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918