Erie Co v. Hilt

Citation62 L.Ed. 1003,38 S.Ct. 435,247 U.S. 97
Decision Date20 May 1918
Docket NumberNo. 846,846
PartiesERIE R. CO. v. HILT et al
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

[Syllabus intentionally omitted] Mr. George S. Hobart, of Jersey City, N. J., for petitioners.

Mr. Raymond Dawson, of New York City, for respondent.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 98-99 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an action for personal injuries caused by the plaintiff being run over on a siding of the defendant's railroad at Garfield, New Jersey. The plaintiff was a boy less than seven years old and had been playing marbles near the siding when a marble rolled under a car. The boy tried to reach the marble with his foot and while he was doing so the car was backed and his left leg was so badly hurt that it had to be cut off. A statute of New Jersey provides that 'if any person shall be injured by an engine or car while walking, standing or playing on any railroad, he shall be deemed to have contributed to the injury sustained, and shall not recover therefor any damages from the company owning or operating said railroad,' with a proviso that the section shall not apply to the crossing of a railroad at a lawful crossing. General Railroad Law, § 55; Compiled Stat. 1910, p. 4245, citing P. L. 1903, p. 673. The trial court notwithstanding this statute, allowed the plaintiff to go to the jury and to obtain and keep a verdict, following such precedents in the circuit as Erie R. Co. v. Swiderski, 197 Fed. 521, 117 C. C. A. 17, and the judgment was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals. 246 Fed. 800.

The ground of the decision seemingly is that the statute does not appear beyond doubt to apply to very young infants, although the word 'playing' sufficiently indicates that it had minors in view, even if the absoluteness of the opening phrase 'any person' were not enough to exclude the reading in of exceptions by the Court. The words of the statute seem to us to require a different construction from that adopted and they have been given their full literal meaning by the Supreme Court of the State in the case of an infant younger than the plaintiff. Barcolini v. Atlantic City & Shore R. R. Co., 82 N. J. Law, 107, 81 Atl. 494. In view of the importance of that tribunal in New Jersey, although not the highest Court in the State, we see no reason why it should not be followed by the Courts of the United States, even if we thought its decision more doubtful than we do.

There is no ground for the argument that the plaintiff was invited upon the tracks. Temptation is not always invitation. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co. v. Reich, 61 N. J. Law, 635...

To continue reading

Request your trial
46 cases
  • Renz v. Penn Cent. Corp.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • September 28, 1981
    ... ...         The major obstacle to this construction of the railroad immunity act is the judicial interpretation of that statute in Egan v. Erie R. Co., 29 N.J. 243, 148 A.2d 830 (1959). That Court perceived the provisions of the railroad immunity statute as hinged upon the common law theory ... were two United States Supreme Court cases, Erie R. Co. v. Duplak, 286 U.S. 440, 52 S.Ct. 610, 76 L.Ed. 1214 (1932) and Erie R. Co. v. Hilt, 247 U.S. 97, 38 S.Ct. 435, 62 L.Ed. 1003 (1918), viz, ... The statute ... seemingly adopts in an unqualified form the policy of the common law as ... ...
  • Ward v. City of Hobbs
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • July 31, 2019
    ... ... diversity jurisdiction, or in federal question jurisdiction and interprets state law, the court looks to the same principles that govern under Erie R.R. v. Tompkins , 304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) (" Erie "), and applies "state law with the objective of obtaining the result that ... v. Hilt , 247 U.S. 97, 100, 101 [38 S.Ct. 435, 62 L.Ed. 1003 (1918) ] ; Erie Railroad Co. v. Duplak , 286 U.S. 440, 444 [52 S.Ct. 610, 76 L.Ed. 1214 (1932) ... ...
  • Schnurman v. Western Cas. & Sur. Co. of Fort Scott, Kan.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1944
    ... ... F.2d 440; Nigro v. United States, 48 S.Ct. 388, 72 ... L.Ed. 600, 376 U.S. 332; Duncan v. Thompson, 315 ... U.S. 1, 62 S.Ct. 422; Erie R. Co. v. Hilt, 247 U.S ... 97, 38 S.Ct. 435; Webster's Collegiate Dictionary; 20 ... C.J. 1241; 35 Am. Jur. 445; 30 C.J., pp. 226, 227, 230; ... ...
  • Teleprompter of Erie, Inc. v. City of Erie
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • July 13, 1983
  • 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