| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

In the 1962 case of Basham v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over an injury claim by an employee against his employer, a railroad company. The plaintiff, Mr. Basham, was injured while working for the Pennsylvania Railroad Company and sought compensation under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). However, he had previously signed a release form that absolved his employer from any liability related to workplace injuries in exchange for certain benefits. The main issue before the court was whether this release form could be considered valid and enforceable or if it violated public policy as set out in FELA. The lower courts ruled in favor of the railroad company based on their interpretation that such releases were not prohibited by FELA unless they were obtained through fraud or duress. On appeal to the Supreme Court though, this decision was reversed with Justice Hugo Black delivering majority opinion stating that such releases are indeed contrary to public policy as outlined within FELA because they undermine its purpose - which is to place full responsibility for employee safety on employers.
In the dissenting opinion for Basham v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a verdict in favor of an injured railroad worker under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there wasn't sufficient evidence presented at trial to prove negligence on part of the railroad company, which is required by FELA for liability. They contended that while accidents and injuries are unfortunate, they do not automatically imply negligence or fault by employers. Furthermore, they criticized the majority's interpretation of "causation" within FELA as overly broad and inconsistent with previous case law interpretations. In their view, this expanded interpretation could potentially lead to unjust outcomes where employers are held liable even when their actions did not directly cause harm to employees.