Anderson v. Atchison Co

Decision Date26 April 1948
Docket NumberS.F. RY,No. 620,620
PartiesANDERSON v. ATCHISON, T. &CO. Certiorari Granted and Judgment Reversed
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Certiorari Granted and Judgment Reversed April 26, 1948.

Mr. Clifton Hildebrand, of Oakland, Cal., for petitioner.

Frank B. Belcher, of Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, as administratrix, filed a complaint in a California state court under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51, 45 U.S.C.A. § 51, to recv er damages for the alleged wrongful death of one L. C. Bristow. The trial court held that the allegations of the complaint, even if true, were totally insufficient to support a judgment for plaintiff, and entered judgment for the defendant. The State Supreme Court, two judges dissenting, affirmed on the same ground. 187 P.2d 729.1

The complaint's allegations and the inferences fairly drawn from them in summary are as follows: November 24, 1942, the deceased was a conductor on respondent's passenger train westbound from Amarillo, Texas, to Belen, New Mexico. At about 5:30 a.m., while the train was moving approximately opposite defendant's station at Gallaher, New Mexico, decedent fell from the train's rear vestibule where it was necessary for him to be in order properly to perform the duty in which he was then engaged, 'checking a certain train order signal at said station' of Gallaher. Decedent's fall resulted in injuries which made it impossible for him to secure help by his own efforts. At the next station where the train stopped, St. Vrain, respondent's employees 'made note of the absence of decedent,' but passed by it and three other station stops, Melrose, Taiban, and Fort Summer, without taking any steps of any kind to ascertain the whereabouts of decedent or what had happened to him. Finally, however, at Yeso, New Mexico, the regular train conductor directed respondent's employees there to wire other employees along the route the train had traversed to ascertain decedent's whereabouts. The Yeso employees 'carelessly and negligently' failed to transmit any message 'for an unnecessarily long period of time,' and when the message was finally received by other of respondent's employees at Clovis, New Mexico, they 'carelessly and negligently failed to institute and pursue a search within a reasonable period of time.' When search was ultimately made decedent was found lying alongside the track adjacent to the point where he had fallen while performing his duties on the rear vestibule opposite the station at Gallaher....

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Ferguson v. Cormack Lines
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 25 Febrero 1957
    ...R. Co., 332 U.S. 827, 68 S.Ct. 203, 92 L.Ed. 402;* affirmance of judgment for defendant affirmed. Anderson v. Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co., 333 U.S. 821, 68 S.Ct. 854, 92 L.Ed. 1108;* affirmance of judgment for defendant Eubanks v. Thompson, 334 U.S. 854, 68 S.Ct. 1528, 92 L.Ed. 1776;* reversa......
  • Wilkerson v. Carthy
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 31 Enero 1949
    ...1334, 91 L.Ed. 1615, Safety Appliance Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 11; Lillie v. Thompson, 332 U.S. 459, 68 S.Ct. 140; Anderson v. Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co., 333 U.S. 821, 68 S.Ct. 854; Eubanks v. Thompson, 334 U.S. 854, 68 S.Ct. 1528; Penn. v. Chicago & N.W.R. Co., 335 U.S. 849, 69 S.Ct. 79; Coray v......
  • Rogers v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co Webb v. Illinois Central Railroad Co Herdman v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co Ferguson v. Cormack Lines
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 25 Febrero 1957
    ...U.S. 430, 70 S.Ct. 226, 94 L.Ed. 236; Wilkerson v. McCarthy, 336 U.S. 53, 69 S.Ct. 413, 93 L.Ed. 497; Anderson v. Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co., 333 U.S. 821, 68 S.Ct. 854, 92 L.Ed. 1108; Lillie v. Thompson, 332 U.S. 459, 68 S.Ct. 140, 92 L.Ed 73; Myers v. Reading Co., 331 U.S. 477, 67 S.Ct. 13......
  • Glow v. Union Pacific R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • 26 Agosto 2009
    ...See, e.g., Wilkerson v. McCarthy, 336 U.S. 53, 60-61, 69 S.Ct. 413, 93 L.Ed. 497 (1949); Anderson v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 333 U.S. 821, 823, 68 S.Ct. 854, 92 L.Ed. 1108 (1948); Delaware, L. & W. Ry. Co. v. Koske, 279 U.S. 7, 11, 49 S.Ct. 202, 73 L.Ed. 578 (1929). It has also been he......
  • 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