Anderson v. LOUISIANA & ARKANSAS RAILWAY COMPANY
| Citation | 457 F.2d 784 |
| Decision Date | 31 March 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 31085.,31085. |
| Parties | Robert ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LOUISIANA & ARKANSAS RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
F. Frank Fontenot, Milling, Saal, Benson, Woodward & Hillyer, New Orleans, La., for defendant-appellant.
Orlando G. Bendana, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before JONES, BELL and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.
In the late evening of October 31, 1968, a switch engine of the Louisiana & Arkansas Railroad Company was being operated in the terminal yards at New Orleans, Louisiana, by C. A. Ledbetter as engineer and Robert Anderson as fireman. An altercation between them resulted in a fight. Ledbetter pulled a revolver from his handbag and pointed it at Anderson. Anderson slumped to the floor of the cab of the locomotive with what turned out to be a disabling stroke. Anderson brought an action against the railroad in the United States District Court under the Federal Employers' Act.1 A jury awarded Anderson damages of $100,000, reduced by $10,000 by reason of contributory negligence. A judgment against the railroad for $90,000 was entered and the railroad has appealed.
During the trial evidence was admitted showing that the engineer's employment had not been terminated, that the engineer had not been disciplined because of the incident with Anderson, and with respect to whether precautions had been taken to prevent the engineer from continuing to take his gun on the locomotive. The admission of this evidence is asserted by the railroad to be reversible error. The question for determination in this cause by the district court was whether the injury sustained by Anderson was caused by any actionable wrong of the railroad company. It is by the conduct of the railroad prior to and at the time of the injury that its liability must be tested. The evidence of the conduct of the railroad subsequent to the incident from which the injury arose had no relevancy on the question of liability or of damages. The evidence was improper and prejudicial. Such exceptions to this rule as there may be are not applicable here. The admission of the evidence of conduct of the railroad company subsequent to the incident during which Anderson's injury occurred constituted error requiring reversal and a remand for a new trial. See McCormick on Evidence 543, § 252; 2 Jones, Evidence 5th Ed. 720, § 387; II Wigmore on Evidence 3rd Ed. 151, § 283; Pitre v. Employers Liability Assurance Corporation, La.App., 234 So.2d 847.
The railroad company contends that it was deprived of a fair trial by reason of the constant interruptions, excessive examination of witnesses and prejudicial comments of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yauch v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co.
...under the FELA" and because evidence of subsequent discharge "was not relevant in the present action"); Anderson v. Louisiana & Arkansas Ry. Co., 457 F.2d 784, 785 (5th Cir.1972) ("The admission of the evidence of conduct of the railroad company subsequent to the incident during which [plai......
-
Beanland v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co.
...District Judge (later Chief Judge of the First Circuit) Bailey Aldrich reached the same conclusion. Cf. Anderson v. Louisiana & Arkansas Ry., 457 F.2d 784, 785 (5th Cir. 1972). Damages resulting from intentional acts, such as the discharge, have no place in a personal injury F.E.L.A. action......
-
Taylor-Travis v. Jackson State Univ.
...Coach Taylor from the initial notice of her termination through the denial of arbitration. JSU cites Anderson v. Louisiana & Arkansas Railway Co., 457 F.2d 784 (5th Cir. 1972) to support its position that the court allowing Coach Taylor to present evidence of JSU's refusal to arbitrate was ......