(a) Every employer shall furnish employment which shall be reasonably safe for the employees engaged therein and shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards and shall adopt and use methods and processes reasonably adequate to render such employment and the places where the employment is performed reasonably safe for his employees and others who are not trespassers, and he shall do everything reasonably necessary to protect the life, health and safety of his employees and others who are not trespassers.
(b) Every employer and every owner of a place of employment, place of public assembly or public building, now or hereafter constructed, shall so construct, repair and maintain the same as to render it reasonably safe; provided, however, that nothing contained in this section shall be construed or applied so as to impose upon any such owner any duties to his tenant, the members of his family, employees, guests or invitees or others entering upon the premises under the tenant’s title, or the public, not now imposed upon him by law.
(c) For the purposes of this section, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them by this subsection:
(1) EMPLOYER. Such term includes every person, firm, corporation, partnership, joint stock association, agent, manager, representative, foreman or other person having control or custody of any employment, place of employment or of any employee, but the terms of this section shall not be construed to cover the employment of agricultural workers or domestic servants.
(2) EMPLOYEE. Such term does not and shall not include agricultural workers or domestic servants.
(3) SAFE and SAFETY. Such terms, applied to any employment or place of employment, place of public assembly or public building, shall mean “reasonably safe” or “reasonable safety” consistent with the lawful purpose of the use and occupancy of the place of employment, place of public assembly or public building and the inherent danger of the employment, the process, operation or situation involved, and, shall include conditions and methods of sanitation and hygiene reasonably necessary for the protection of the life, health and safety of the employees and others who are not trespassers.
(Acts 1939, No. 161, p. 232; Code 1940, T. 26, §12.)
Notes of Decisions
Ex Parte Shelby Cty. Health Care Auth., 850 So. 2d 332 (Ala. 2002).
· cites it 15× “" Applying the standards of statutory interpretation set out above, we must conclude that § 25-1-1, Ala.Code 1975, places a duty on employers to provide a reasonably safe workplace and reasonably safe working conditions at the workplace.”
Stovall v. Universal Const. Co., Inc., 893 So. 2d 1090 (Ala. 2004).
· cites it 5× “The duty to provide a safe workplace is a statutory duty imposed upon employers by § 25-1-1(a), Ala.Code 1975. Although the statute provides a broad definition of employer, [2] and although this Court has previously characterized a general contractor's relationship with his…”
Morris v. Merritt Oil Co., 686 So. 2d 1139 (Ala. 1996).
· cites it 14× “Ala.Code 1975, § 25-1-1, provides: "(a) Every employer shall furnish employment which shall be reasonably safe for the employees engaged therein and shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards and shall adopt and use methods and processes reasonably adequate to render…”
DuPont v. Yellow Cab Co. of Birmingham, 565 So. 2d 190 (Ala. 1990).
· cites it 3× “Ala. Code 1975, § 25-1-1. Furthermore, Yellow Cab was subject to the Alabama Workmen's Compensation Act, Ala.”
Bonham v. Regions Mortg., Inc., 129 F. Supp. 2d 1315 (M.D. Ala. 2001).
· cites it 2× “The court will assume that Regions had a duty of care to Bonham to ensure that Luther properly conducted promotion selection and interviewing, see 1975 Ala.Code § 25-1-1 through 25-1-9 (prohibiting age discrimination), that Luther’s actions in the hiring procedure were arguably…”
Cason v. Miller, 202 So. 3d 669 (Ala. 2016).
· cites it 2× “2 The Casons also argue that Progress Rail is distinguishable because that case involved multiple defendants and because that case was brought pursuant to § 25-1-1, Ala. Code 1975. 3 The Casons do not explain how those differences affect the applicability of the exclusive-remedy…”
Robert Burton & Assocs., Ltd. v. Morris, 999 So. 2d 932 (Ala. 2008).
· cites it 2× “1 Because the tolling provision of § 25-5-80 provides that only payments of “compensation,” a defined term in § 25-1-1, 2 toll the statute of limitations, benefits paid pursuant to the workers’ compensation laws of another state do not toll the statute of limitations for filing…”
Britt v. Shelby Cnty. Health Care Auth., 850 So. 2d 322 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001).
· cites it 6× “" I interpret Britt's theory of recovery to state a cause of action under § 25-1-1, Ala.Code 1975. Section 25-1-1 establishes an employer's duty to provide an employee with a safe workplace; it also allows an employee a cause of action against a co-employee.”
Weaver v. Frazer, 576 So. 2d 200 (Ala. 1991).
· cites it 4× “” Weaver contends 1) that Smithson and Frazer knew or should have known that an air pump should not be used to pump acid because of the potential pressure build-up, which could cause injury or death, and 2) that Smithson and Frazer breached their affirmative duty to maintain a…”
Kennemer v. McFann, 470 So. 2d 1113 (Ala. 1985).
“The trial judge, by quoting portions of § 25-1-1, 1975 Code, when taken in concert with the entire charge, including giving Defendants' requested instructions, informed the jury that the employer is primarily responsible for providing employees a safe place to work, but that…”
Procter & Gamble Co. v. Staples, 551 So. 2d 949 (Ala. 1989).
· cites it 4× “1985), this Court observed the following regarding § 25-1-1: “In accord with this statute, which is merely a codification of earlier common law, Foreman v.”
Galloway v. Ozark Striping, Inc., 26 So. 3d 413 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “1989) (construing Ala. Code 1975, § 25-1-1, as requiring “employers” to provide reasonably safe place to work to “employees” as those terms are defined therein).”
— Ala. Code § 25-1-1(1) — 1 case
Robert Burton & Assocs., Ltd. v. Morris, 999 So. 2d 932 (Ala. 2008).
“1 Because the tolling provision of § 25-5-80 provides that only payments of “compensation,” a defined term in § 25-1-1, 2 toll the statute of limitations, benefits paid pursuant to the workers’ compensation laws of another state do not toll the statute of limitations for filing…”
— Ala. Code § 25-1-1(a) — 7 cases
Stovall v. Universal Const. Co., Inc., 893 So. 2d 1090 (Ala. 2004).
“The duty to provide a safe workplace is a statutory duty imposed upon employers by § 25-1-1(a), Ala.Code 1975. Although the statute provides a broad definition of employer, [2] and although this Court has previously characterized a general contractor's relationship with his…”
Ex Parte Shelby Cty. Health Care Auth., 850 So. 2d 332 (Ala. 2002).
“" Applying the standards of statutory interpretation set out above, we must conclude that § 25-1-1, Ala.Code 1975, places a duty on employers to provide a reasonably safe workplace and reasonably safe working conditions at the workplace.”
Morris v. Merritt Oil Co., 686 So. 2d 1139 (Ala. 1996).
“Ala.Code 1975, § 25-1-1, provides: "(a) Every employer shall furnish employment which shall be reasonably safe for the employees engaged therein and shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards and shall adopt and use methods and processes reasonably adequate to render…”
Britt v. Shelby Cnty. Health Care Auth., 850 So. 2d 322 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001).
“" I interpret Britt's theory of recovery to state a cause of action under § 25-1-1, Ala.Code 1975. Section 25-1-1 establishes an employer's duty to provide an employee with a safe workplace; it also allows an employee a cause of action against a co-employee.”
— Ala. Code § 25-1-1(c) — 1 case
Stovall v. Universal Const. Co., Inc., 893 So. 2d 1090 (Ala. 2004).
“The duty to provide a safe workplace is a statutory duty imposed upon employers by § 25-1-1(a), Ala.Code 1975. Although the statute provides a broad definition of employer, [2] and although this Court has previously characterized a general contractor's relationship with his…”
— Ala. Code § 25-1-1(c)(1) — 3 cases
Stovall v. Universal Const. Co., Inc., 893 So. 2d 1090 (Ala. 2004).
“The duty to provide a safe workplace is a statutory duty imposed upon employers by § 25-1-1(a), Ala.Code 1975. Although the statute provides a broad definition of employer, [2] and although this Court has previously characterized a general contractor's relationship with his…”
Morris v. Merritt Oil Co., 686 So. 2d 1139 (Ala. 1996).
“Ala.Code 1975, § 25-1-1, provides: "(a) Every employer shall furnish employment which shall be reasonably safe for the employees engaged therein and shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards and shall adopt and use methods and processes reasonably adequate to render…”
— Ala. Code § 25-1-1(c)(3) — 2 cases
Ex Parte Shelby Cty. Health Care Auth., 850 So. 2d 332 (Ala. 2002).
“" Applying the standards of statutory interpretation set out above, we must conclude that § 25-1-1, Ala.Code 1975, places a duty on employers to provide a reasonably safe workplace and reasonably safe working conditions at the workplace.”
Morris v. Merritt Oil Co., 686 So. 2d 1139 (Ala. 1996).
“Ala.Code 1975, § 25-1-1, provides: "(a) Every employer shall furnish employment which shall be reasonably safe for the employees engaged therein and shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards and shall adopt and use methods and processes reasonably adequate to render…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.