United States v. Hooper

Because my differences with the majority seem to me to be too fundamental to be satisfied with a bare dissent, I shall attempt to sum up and point them out.

We differ as to what plaintiff had to prove to take his case to the jury. We differ, too, as to the effect of what he proved. My associates say in effect that because plaintiff, a young farmer with a second grade education, the effective use of whose feet had been entirely destroyed, did not make affirmative proof that he had tried and been unable to get work which did not require such use, he failed to make a ease for a jury verdict on…