Erie Railroad Company v. James Welsh

Citation242 U.S. 303,37 S.Ct. 116,61 L.Ed. 319
Decision Date18 December 1916
Docket NumberNo. 29,29
PartiesERIE RAILROAD COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. JAMES T. WELSH
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Messrs. Leroy A. Manchester, C. D. Hine, James B. Kennedy, and John W. Ford for plaintiff in error.

Mr. William R. Stewart for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court:

The supreme court of Ohio (89 Ohio St. 81, 105 N. E. 189) affirmed a circuit court judgment which sustained a judgment re- covered in a court of common pleas by Welsh against the Erie Railroad Company for damages on account of personal injuries suffered by him while in its employ as a yard conductor in the Brier Hill yard, near Youngstown, Ohio; overruling the contention of the defendant (now plaintiff in error) that by certain rulings of the trial court defendant had been deprived of rights secured to it by the Federal Employers' Liability Act of April 22, 1908 (chap. 149, 35 Stat. at L. 65, Comp. Stat. 19§3, § 8657).

Plaintiff's case was that, on March 7, 1911, about 11 o'clock P. M., while in the performance of his duties, he attempted to alight from the footboard of a slowly moving locomotive; that in so doing he stepped upon a pulley wheel of an interlocking mechanism situate between the tracks, and then covered with snow, and the turning of the wheel under his weight caused his foot to become entangled in the interlocking wires, as a result of which he fell partly under the locomotive and sustained serious injuries. The negligence attributed to defendant was the failure properly to guard or cover the wires and the pulley wheel. There was evidence tending to show such a knowledge on plaintiff's part of the nature and character of the interlocking apparatus and its location between the tracks, and such a knowledge and appreciation of the dangers incident thereto, as to bring into play the defense of assumption of risk (Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Horton, 233 U. S. 492, 503, 58 L. ed. 1062, 1069, L.R.A.1915C, 1, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 635, Ann. Cas. 1915B, 475, 8 N. C. C. A. 834; Jacobs v. Southern R. Co. 241 U. S. 229, 234, 30 L. ed. 970, 976, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 588), if the case came within the Federal act; and this depended upon whether plaintiff was employed by defendant in interstate commerce at the time he received his injuries. Defendant's fourth request was for the submission to the jury of the question whether plaintiff was employed in such commerce, with an appropriate instruction embodying the rule as to assumption of risk in case they should find him to have been so employed. This request, which in terms invoked the protection of the act of Congress, was refused, and the trial court, in the in- structions given, declined to follow that act or the common law, and, on the contrary, instructed the jury that, under a state statute held to be applicable, the assumption of risk was not a defense.

The rulings of the trial court were sustained by the supreme court (and presumably by the circuit court) upon the ground that, upon the undisputed evidence, plaintiff was not at the time employed in interstate commerce. As to this question, there was testimony tending to show that defendant was a common carrier by rail engaged in commerce between the states, and that plaintiff was and for some time had been a yard conductor engaged in night duty at its Brier Hill yard, a mile or more west of Youngstown; that he performed miscellaneous services in the way of shifting cars and breaking up and making up trains, under orders of the yardmaster, and had to apply...

To continue reading

Request your trial
199 cases
  • Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Jolly's Adm'x
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • 14 Enero 1930
    ... ... the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company. Judgment adverse ... to defendant, and it ... 591, Ann.Cas. 1914C, ... 159; Van Buskirk v. Erie R. Co. (C.C.A.) 279 F. 622; ... New York C. & H. R. R ... 729, ... 58 L.Ed. 1226. In Erie Ry. Co. v. Welsh, 242 U.S ... 303, 37 S.Ct. 116, 118, 61 L.Ed. 319, the ... three children, James Lee, age 8 years, Hazel Elizabeth, age ... 6 years, and ... ...
  • Lorenzetti v. American Trust Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • 19 Mayo 1942
    ...road, injured while alighting from a freight engine to report for orders, was not in interstate commerce. Erie R. Co. v. Welsh, 242 U.S. 303, 37 S.Ct. 116, 61 L.Ed. 319. One line of cases holds that track maintenance men and similar employees of railroads are engaged in commerce; another ho......
  • Middleton v. Texas Power Light Co
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 3 Marzo 1919
    ...L. R. A. 1916C, 797; Louisville & Nash. R. R. Co. v. Parker, 242 U. S. 13, 37 Sup. Ct. 4, 61 L. Ed. 119; Erie R. R. Co. v. Welsh, 242 U. S. 303, 306, 37 Sup. Ct. 116, 61 L. Ed. 319; Southern Ry. Co. v. Puckett, 244 U. S. 571, 573, 37 Sup. Ct. 703, 61 L. Ed. 1321, Ann. Cas. 1918B, 69), reaso......
  • Kepner v. Railroad Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 27 Marzo 1929
    ...recover under the act. Shanks v. Railroad, 239 U.S. 445; Railroad v. Winters, 242 U.S. 353; Railroad v. Behrens, 233 U.S. 473; Railroad v. Welch, 242 U.S. 303; Railroad v. Harrington, 241 U.S. 177; Kelly v. Railroad, 238 Fed. 95; Dunn v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. (Mo.) 966; Lacasse v. Rail......
  • 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