Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-422 — NE Code / Chapter 48 / Section 48-422
View Statute 48-422
Status: in_force

Every person operating a plant where machinery is used who shall violate any of the provisions of sections 48-401 to 48-424 shall be liable in damages to any person injured, as a result thereof, or to the heirs of any person who shall have died as a result thereof.

Laws 1919, c. 190, tit. IV, art. IV, § 18, p. 562;

C.S.1922, § 7699;

C.S.1929, § 48-418;

R.S.1943, § 48-422.

Employee's acceptance of benefits under Workmen's Compensation Act ordinarily constitutes release to employer of claims at law arising from the injury. Edelman v. Ralph Printing & Lithographing, Inc., 189 Neb. 763, 205 N.W.2d 340 (1973).

Employee's acceptance of benefits under Workmen's Compensation Act ordinarily constitutes release to employer of claims at law arising from the injury. Edelman v. Ralph Printing & Lithographing, Inc., 189 Neb. 763, 205 N.W.2d 340 (1973).

Recovery was denied in action brought under this section against manager of elevator. Fosler v. Aden, 175 Neb. 535, 122 N.W.2d 494 (1963).

Recovery was denied in action brought under this section against manager of elevator. Fosler v. Aden, 175 Neb. 535, 122 N.W.2d 494 (1963).

Applicability of act is limited to operator. Quist v. Duda, 159 Neb. 393, 67 N.W.2d 481 (1954).

Applicability of act is limited to operator. Quist v. Duda, 159 Neb. 393, 67 N.W.2d 481 (1954).

Employer failing to comply with statutory duty for benefit of employees can be held liable for injuries to employees only if there is a causal connection between his negligence and the injury of which the employee complains. Smith v. Morton Motor Co., 145 Neb. 396, 16 N.W.2d 843 (1944).

Employer failing to comply with statutory duty for benefit of employees can be held liable for injuries to employees only if there is a causal connection between his negligence and the injury of which the employee complains. Smith v. Morton Motor Co., 145 Neb. 396, 16 N.W.2d 843 (1944).

Where evidence failed to show that any machinery was used in room where plaintiff worked, court was not required to instruct jury with reference to this section. Grover v. Aaron Ferer & Sons, 122 Neb. 755, 241 N.W. 539 (1932).

Where evidence failed to show that any machinery was used in room where plaintiff worked, court was not required to instruct jury with reference to this section. Grover v. Aaron Ferer & Sons, 122 Neb. 755, 241 N.W. 539 (1932).

Notwithstanding injury to minor employee was caused by employer's violation of statute requiring screens to protect from machinery, Workmen's Compensation Act applied and employer was not liable at common law. Navracel v. Cudahy Packing Co., 109 Neb. 506, 191 N.W. 659 (1922), reh'g denied, 109 Neb. 512, 193 N.W. 768 (1923).

Notwithstanding injury to minor employee was caused by employer's violation of statute requiring screens to protect from machinery, Workmen's Compensation Act applied and employer was not liable at common law. Navracel v. Cudahy Packing Co., 109 Neb. 506, 191 N.W. 659 (1922), reh'g denied, 109 Neb. 512, 193 N.W. 768 (1923).

Where appliances furnished for protection of employee are of standard make and in common use, and no defect is shown therein, cause of action is not made out for not furnishing proper appliances. Grant Storage Battery Co. v. DeLay, 87 F.2d 726 (8th Cir. 1937).

Where appliances furnished for protection of employee are of standard make and in common use, and no defect is shown therein, cause of action is not made out for not furnishing proper appliances. Grant Storage Battery Co. v. DeLay, 87 F.2d 726 (8th Cir. 1937).