Kaplan v. Sertell
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtBouldin, J.
The action is for personal injuries and founded upon alleged breach of the common-law duty of the master to furnish reasonably safe tools for the use of his servant.
Injuries in such eases are presumed to come under the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Acts 1919, pi 206). The complaint should aver facts that take the case without the Compensation Law, or, otherwise stated, bring it within one of the exceptions thereto. Steagall v. Sless-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co., 205 Ala. 100, 87 So. 787.
Count 3 of the complaint, the count upon which the case was tried, is set out in the report of the case. It…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Steagall v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1920
3Cited by12 opinions
- Gentry v. Swann Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Pound v. GauldingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
- W. B. Davis Son v. RupleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- De Arman v. Ingalls Iron Works Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1952
- Sinclair Refining Company v. George L. HowellCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.