William Winfree v. Northern Pacific Railway Company

• Decision Date: 24 February 1913
• Docket Number: No. 139,139
• Citation: 33 S.Ct. 273,227 U.S. 296,57 L.Ed. 518
• Parties: WILLIAM H. WINFREE, as Administrator of the Estate of Albert E. Phipps, Deceased, Plff. in Err., v. NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

227 U.S. 296

33 S.Ct. 273

57 L.Ed. 518

WILLIAM H. WINFREE, as Administrator of the Estate of Albert E. Phipps, Deceased, Plff. in Err.,

v NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.

No. 139.

Submitted January 23, 1913.

Decided February 24, 1913.

Mr. B. C. Mosby for plaintiff in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 297-300 intentionally omitted] Mr. Charles W. Bunn for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice McKenna delivered the opinion of the court:

This action was brought in the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Washington, eastern division, by plaintiff in error (herein referred to as plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Albert E. Phipps, deceased, against defendant in error (herein referred to as defendant), for the wrongful death, it is alleged, of Albert E. Phipps, a minor, of the age of eighteen years and five months, while acting as fireman upon a freight locomotive of the defendant in the state of Washington. The negligence of defendant is alleged, and that defendant was engaged in interstate commerce; that decedent had not been emancipated nor had his parents knowledge of his employment; that they lived in the state of Wyoming and that the action was brought for their benefit under the provisions of the act of Congress of April 22, 1908, entitled, 'An Act Relating to the Liability of Common Carriers by Railroad to their Employees in Certain Cases.' [35 Stat. at L. 65, chap. 149, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1322.]

Defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground, among others, that the act of Congress upon which plaintiff relied was passed, approved, and became a law after plaintiff's alleged cause of action accrued, and imposed no liability, therefore, on defendant by reason of the facts set forth in the complaint. The demurrer was sustained, and, plaintiff refusing to plead further, judgment was entered dismissing the complaint and for costs. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment. ——L.R.A.(N.S.) ——, 97 C. C. A. 392, 173 Fed. 65.

Plaintiff, to support his contention that the act of Congress has retroactive operation, presents a very elaborate argument based on the extensive effect which courts have given to remedial statutes, applying them, it is contended, to the past as well as to the future. The court of appeals met the argument, as we think it should be met. by saying that statutes that had received such extensive application such as were 'intended to remedy a mischief, to promote public justice, to correct innocent mistakes, to cure irregularities in judicial proceedings, or to give effect to the acts and contracts of individuals according to the intent thereof.' It is hardly necessary to say that such statutes are exceptions to the almost universal rule that statutes are...