Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Keokee Consolidated Coke Company v. Taylor

• 1913 • 234 U.S. 224 • White Court
In the case of Keokee Consolidated Coke Company v. Taylor, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Taylor, a coal miner who was injured while working for Keokee Consolidated Coke Company. The company argued that they were not liable for his injuries because he had signed an employment contract which included a clause waiving his right to sue for any injury sustained during work. However, the court held that such contracts are void as against public policy and therefore unenforceable. This...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1913
Docket: 372
234 U.S. 224
34 S. Ct. 856
58 L. Ed. 1288
1914 U.S. LEXIS 1143

Keokee Consolidated Coke Company v. Taylor

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Keokee Consolidated Coke Company v. Taylor, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Taylor, a coal miner who was injured while working for Keokee Consolidated Coke Company. The company argued that they were not liable for his injuries because he had signed an employment contract which included a clause waiving his right to sue for any injury sustained during work. However, the court held that such contracts are void as against public policy and therefore unenforceable. This decision established important precedent regarding workers' rights and employer liability in cases of workplace accidents or injuries.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Keokee Consolidated Coke Company v. Taylor, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring coal and coke companies to pay their employees in legal tender rather than company-issued scrip was unconstitutional. The dissenting justices believed this violated the contract clause of the Constitution by interfering with private contractual relationships between employers and employees. They also contended that there were no sufficient grounds for such interference as it did not serve any significant public interest or policy objective. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view that paying workers in scrip could lead to abuses or exploitation, arguing instead that if any problems arose from this practice, they should be addressed through individual lawsuits rather than broad legislative action.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Jun 08, 1914
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms