Gulf, Colorado Santa Fe Railway Company v. Mary McGinnis

Citation57 L.Ed. 785,33 S.Ct. 426,228 U.S. 173
Decision Date07 April 1913
Docket NumberNo. 762,762
PartiesGULF, COLORADO, & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. MARY J. MCGINNIS, Administratrix, etc
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Messrs. A. H. Culwell, J. W. Terry, Gardiner Lathrop, and A. B. Browne for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Winbourn Pearce and A. L. Curtis for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Lurton delivered the opinion of the court:

This action was brought in a state court of Texas under the employers' liability act of April 22, 1908 (35 Stat. at L. 65, chap. 149, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1322), by the administratrix of W. T. McGinnis, to re- cover damages for his negligent death while in the service of the plaintiff in error, and while engaged as engineer on an interstate passenger train. The cause of the death was a derailment which occurred while the train was passing over a switch. The defense of the company was that the derailment was caused by malicious tampreing with the switch by a stranger, and that the company had not been guilty of any negligence in either providing a safe track and appliance, or in the inspoection or maintenance of the track and appliances. There was a jury, verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, which, upon writ of error to the court of civil appeals for the third supreme judicial district of the state of Texas, was affirmed. A writ of error has been allowedn to that court, it being the highest court to which the case could be carried under the law of the state.

It is assigned as error that the court misconstrued the character of the liability imposed by the act under which the suit was brought by a ruling that there might be a judgment for the benefit of one of the surviving children, although there was neither allegation nor evidence that that surviving child was either dependent upon, or had any reasonable ground for expecting, any pecuniary benefit from a continuance of the decedent's life.

The decedent left a widow and four children, and the suit was brought by the widow, as administratrix, for the benefit of herself and the four children named in the petition. One of the surviving children was Mrs. Nellie Saunders, a married woman, residing with and maintained by her husband. There was neither allegation nor evidence that Mrs. Saunders was in any way dependent upon the decedent, nor that she had any reasonable expectation of any pecuniary benefit as a result of a continuation of his life. The court was requested to instruct the jury that it could not find any damage in favor of Mrs. Saunders, but this it declined to do.

The jury was instructed if they found for the plaintiff, to return a verdict for such a sum as would justly compensate the persons for whose benefit the suit was brought for such pecuniary benefits as they might believe from the evidence the beneficiaries had a reasonable expectation of receiving from the decedent, if his death had not been so occasioned. They were further told to find a round sum in favor of the plaintiff, and then apportion that sum among all the persons for whom the suit had been brought, stating in their verdict, 'how much, if anything, you find for each of said persons.' The jury returned a verdict...

To continue reading

Request your trial
252 cases
  • Kennedy v. Carnival Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • March 6, 2019
    ...are unavailable under DOHSA, just as much as they are unavailable under the FELA. See, e.g., Gulf, Colo., & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. McGinnis, 228 U.S. 173, 175, 33 S.Ct. 426, 57 L.Ed. 785 (1913) (recovery under FELA "must ... be limited to compensating those ... as are shown to have sustained s......
  • Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Humphries
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • October 28, 1935
    ... ... , against the Illinois Central Railroad Company ... Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant ... 145; [174 ... Miss. 462] Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. McGinnis, 228 U.S ... 173; ... 262, 246 ... U.S. 525; Gulf, Colo. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Moser, ... 275 U.S. 133; ... Mt. Vernon, 56 ... N.Y. 391; Railway Co. v. Howard, 90 Tenn. 144; 8 R ... C. L., ... ...
  • Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Jolly's Adm'x
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • January 14, 1930
    ... ... the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company. Judgment adverse ... to defendant, and it ... 148; Slatinka v. Railway ... Administration, 194 Iowa 159, 188 N.W. 20, ... 625, 35 S.Ct. 143, 144, 59 L.Ed ... 392; Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Mosler, 275 U.S ... 133, ... In Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. McGinnis, 228 U.S ... 173, 33 S.Ct. 426, 427, 57 L.Ed ... ...
  • The Erie Lighter 108
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • April 16, 1918
    ... ... the untimely death of the deceased employe (Gulf, ... Colorado, etc., Ry. Co. v. McGinnis, 228 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT