Hamarstrom v. M.K.T. Ry. Co., No. 18850.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtShain
Citation116 S.W.2d 280
PartiesMARY L. HAMARSTROM, CLAIMANT, RESPONDENT, v. MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RY. CO., APPELLANT.
Decision Date04 April 1938
Docket NumberNo. 18850.
116 S.W.2d 280
MARY L. HAMARSTROM, CLAIMANT, RESPONDENT,
v.
MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RY. CO., APPELLANT.
No. 18850.
Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.
April 4, 1938.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jackson County. — Hon. Darius A. Brown, Judge.

[116 S.W.2d 281]

AFFIRMED.

Cooper, Neel, Kemp & Sutherland and Frank J. Rogers for appellant.

(1) The court erred in affirming the award of the Workmen's Compensation Commission for the reason that the Workmen's Compensation Commission was without jurisdiction to entertain plaintiff's claim and make an award thereon as Hamarstrom was engaged in interstate commerce at the time of his injury and the federal act is controlling. (a) Hamarstrom's act in transporting mail, reports relating to cars moving in interstate traffic, wheel reports of a train moving in interstate traffic and office communications, from the yard office in Kansas to the local freight house in Missouri, was an act of interstate commerce. Zenz v. Industrial Accident Comm. (Calif.), 169 Pac. 364, L.R.A. 1918D, 423; Lynch v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 227 Mass. 123, 116 N.E. 401, L.R.A. 1918D, 419; Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321, 47 L. Ed. 492; Kepner v. R.R. Co. (Mo.), 15 S.W. (2d) 825; Erie R.R. Co. v. Jacobus, 221 Fed. 335; Noguerra v. N.Y., N.H. & H.R.R. Co., 32 F. (2d) 179; 45 U.S.C.A., section 51; Colasurdo v. Central R. of N.J., 180 Fed. 832; New York Central R. Co. v. Winfield, 244 U.S. 147; United States v. Simpson, 252 U.S. 465, 64 L. Ed. 665; United States v. Slater, 123 Fed. 115; United States v. Burch, 226 Fed. 974; United States v. Chavez, 228 U.S. 525, 57 L. Ed. 950; United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 234 U.S. 548, 58 L. Ed. 1459; United States v. Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co., 149 Fed. 486. (b) Hamarstrom at the time of his injury was engaged in work directly connected with interstate transportation and so closely related thereto as to be practically a part thereof. St. L.S.F. & Tex. Ry. Co. v. Maude Searle, 229 U.S. 156, 57 L. Ed. 1129; Pecos & Northern Tex. Ry. Co. v. Rosenbloom, 240 U.S. 439, 60 L. Ed. 730; Crecelius v. Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co., 274 Mo. 671, 284 Mo. 26; Pedersen v. Delaware L. & R. Co., 229 U.S. 146, 57 L. Ed. 1125; St. L.S.F. Ry. Co. v. Mills, 3 F. (2d) 882; Southern Ry. Co. v. Wilmouth (Va.), 153 S.E. 875; Anderson v. Director General of Railroads (N.J.), 110 Atl. 829; Zenz v. Industrial Accident Comm. (Calif.), 169 Pac. 364, L.R.A. 1918D, 423; Lynch v. Boston & Maine R.R., 227 Mass. 123, 116 N.E. 401, L.R.A. 1918D, 419; United States v. Everett L. Simpson, 252 U.S. 465, 64 L. Ed. 665; United States v. Slater, 123 Fed. 115; United States v. Burch, 226 Fed. 974; United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 234 U.S. 548, 58 L. Ed. 1459; United States v. Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co., 149 Fed. 486; United States v. Chavez, 228 U.S. 525, 57 L. Ed. 950; Colasurdo v. Central R.R. of N.J., 180 Fed. 832, l.c. 838; Aldridge v. Wabash R.R. Co. (Mo.), 73 S.W. (2d) 401, l.c. 403; Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.A., sec. 51; Howard v. Illinois Central R. Co., 207 U.S. 463, 52 L. Ed. 297; N.Y.C.R. Co. v. Winfield, 244 U.S. 147, l.c. 149; Erie R. Co. v. Jacobus, 221 Fed. 335; Mondou v. New York, N.H. & H.R. Co., 223 U.S. 1, l.c. 47; 2 Roberts' Federal Liability of Carriers (2 Ed.), page 1370; Cheney v. Terminal R.R. Assoc. of St. Louis (Mo. App.), 70 S.W. (2d) 66; Sheehan v. Terminal R.R. Assoc. of St. Louis (Mo.), 81 S.W. (2d) 305; Brown's Admr. v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., 12 F. (2d) 319; McNatt v. Wabash Ry. Co., (Mo.), 108 S.W. (2d) 33; Delaware L. & W.R. Co. v. Scales, 18 F. (2d) 73; Brennor v. Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co., 27 Pac. (2d) 1082 (certiorari denied 283 U.S. 829, 75 L. Ed. 1442); Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co. v. Industrial Commission (Wis.), 258 N.W. 608; Larkin v. N.C.C.R. Co., 232 N.Y.S. 363; Gulf C. & S.F. Ry. Co. v. Young (Texas), 284 S.W. 664; Ohio Valley Electric Ry. Co. v. Brumfield Admr. (Ky.), 203 S.W. 541; The Erie Lighter, 108, 250 Fed. 490; Wells Fargo & Company v. Taylor, 254 U.S. 175; Milburn v. Chicago, M. St. P. & P.R. Co. (Mo.), 56 S.W. (2d) 80. (c) The work which Hamarstrom was doing at the time of his injury tended to facilitate and aid the movement of cars in interstate transportation and a failure to perform such work would hinder and delay such transportation. 2 Roberts' Federal Liability of Carriers (2 Ed.), par. 748; McAdoo v. McCoy (Tex. Civ. App.), 215 S.W. 870; Johnson v. Great Northern R.R. Co., 178 Fed. 643; Trowbridge v. Kansas City & W.B. Ry. Co., 192 Mo. App. 52, 179 S.W. 777. (2) Defendant's liability for damages for the injuries suffered by Hamarstrom is so completely covered by the provisions of the Federal Employers' Liability Act as to prevent any award under the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Act. New York Central R.R. Co. v. Winfield, 244 U.S. 147, 61 L. Ed. 1045; Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington R.R. Co. v. Smith, 250 U.S. 101, 63 L. Ed. 869; Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Russo, 91 Ind. App. 48 (certiorari denied 75 L. Ed. 750); Bennor v. Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co. (Wash.), 27 Pac. (2d) 1082; Wheelock v. Ind. Comm. (Ill.), 149 N.E. 514, 517; Sailor v. Missouri Pac. R.R. Co., 18 S.W. (2d) 82, l.c. 83, 322 Mo. 396. (3) The work which Hamarstrom was doing directly and immediately affected interstate transportation and such effect was not so remote as to render the Federal Act inapplicable. Sailor v. Missouri Pac. R.R. Co., 322 Mo. 396, 18 S.W. (2d) 82; Morrison v. Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co., 103 Wash. 650, 175 Pac. 325; Shanks v. Delaware L. & W.R. Co., 239 U.S. 556; Oglesby v. St. L.S.F.R. Co. (Mo.), 1 S.W. (2d) 172; Scott v. Virginian Ry. Co. (W. Va.), 184 S.E. 559 (certiorari denied 80 L. Ed. 1403); Sweany v. Wabash Ry. Co. (Mo. App.), 80 S.W. (2d) 216; Fenstermacher v. C., R.I. & P. Co., 309 Mo. 475; Yarde v. Hines, 209 Mo. App. 547; Satterlee v. St. Louis & S.F. Ry. Co. (Mo.), 82 S.W. (2d) 69; Pedersen v. Delaware, L. & R.W. Co., 229 U.S. 146, 57 L. Ed. 1125; Pecos & Northern Texas Ry. Co. v. Rosenbloom, 240 U.S. 439, 60 L. Ed. 730; Manes v. Frisco (Mo. App.), 220 S.W. 17; McNatt v. Wabash Ry. Co. (Mo.), 108 S.W. (2d) 33, l.c. 40; 2 Roberts on Federal Liability of Carriers, (2 Ed.), par. 748; Johnson v. Great Northern R.R. Co., 178 Fed. 643; Trowbridge v. K.C. & W.B. Ry. Co., 192 Mo. App. 52, 179 S.W. 777; Pipal v. Grand Trunk Western Ry. Co. (Ill.), 173 N.E. 372, l.c. 374 (certiorari denied 75 L. Ed. 1449); Coal & Coke Co. v. Deal, 231 Fed. 604, 245 U.S. 681, 62 L. Ed. 544; Delaware L. & W.R. Co. v. Yurkonis, 238 U.S. 439, 59 L. Ed. 1397; Rossi v. Penn. R.R. Co., 115 N.J.L. 1, 117 N.J.L. 148; Cassin v. Lusk, 277 Mo. 663, l.c. 672; DeSantis v. N.Y., N.H. & H.R. Co., 74 F. (2d) 261; Ohio Valley Electric Ry. Co. v. Brumfield, Admr. (Ky.), 203 S.W. 541; Stogsdill v. St. L.S.F. Ry. Co., 337 Mo. 136, 85 S.W. (2d) 447; C., B. & Q.R. Co. v. Harrington, 241 U.S. 177; Sheehan v. Terminal R.R. Assoc. of St. Louis (Mo.), 81 S.W. (2d) 305; Drew v. Missouri Pac. R. Co. (Mo.), 100 S.W. (2d) 516; Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Williams (Texas), 200 S.W. 1149; Brewer v. Missouri Pac. R. Co. (Mo. App.), 259 S.W. 825; Stewart v. Ind. Comm. (Utah), 15 Pac. (2d) 336; Pedersen v. Delaware L. & R. Co., 229 U.S. 146, 57 L. Ed. 1125.

Thomas W. Skidmore and Hume & Raymond for respondent.

(1) The court committed no error in affirming the award of the Workmen's Compensation Commission as Hamarstrom was not engaged in interstate transportation by railroad nor in work so closely connected therewith as to constitute a part thereof within the meaning of the Federal Employer's Liability Act. (a) In carrying the company mail in his pocket while being transported on a street car not owned by appellant over the State line, Hamarstrom was not directly engaged in interstate transportation by railroad, within the meaning of the Federal Act. Wells Fargo & Co. v. Taylor, 254 U.S. 175, 41 Sup. Ct. Rep. 93, l.c. 97 and 98; Pederson v. Delaware L. & W.R. Co., 229 U.S. 146, 44 Sup. Ct. Rpt. 648, 649; Allen v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 331 Mo. 461, 53 S.W. (2d) 884, 889; Chicago & N.W. Ry. Co. v. Bolle, 284 U.S. 74, 52 Sup. Ct. 59, 61; Gilvary v. Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co., 292 U.S. 57, 54 Sup. Ct. Rep. 573, 574; Raymond v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co., 243 U.S. 43, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 268, l.c. 269; Kulczyk v. Rockport S.S. Co. (Mich.), 8 Fed. Supp. 336, l.c. 337; Hendrick v. Maryland, 235 U.S. 610, 35 Sup. Ct. Rpt. 140, 142; Bradley v. Public Utililties Comm. of Ohio, 289 U.S. 92, 53 S. Ct. Rpt. 577, 578; New York Dock Railway v. Pennsylvania R.R. Co., 62 Fed. (2d) 1010, 1014; Trout v. Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.), 39 S.W. (2d) 424, 427; Hines, Director General of Railroads v. Baechtel, 137 Md. 513, 113 Atl. 126, 127 and 128; Campbell River Mills Co. v. Chicago, M. St. P. & P.R. Co. (Wash.), 42 Fed. (2d) 775, 778. (b) Hamarstrom was not engaged in work so closely connected with interstate transportation by railroad as to be practically a part thereof. Industrial Accident Comms. v. Payne, 259 U.S. 182, 42 Sup. Ct. Rpt. 489, 491; Allen v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 331 Mo. 461, 53 S.W. (2d) 884, l.c. 890; Milburn v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P.R. Co., 331 Mo. 1171, 56 S.W. (2d) 80, l.c. 86; Manes v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 205 Mo. App. 300, 220 S.W. 14, 16; Sailor v. Mo. Pac. Railway Co., 322 Mo. 396, 18 S.W. (2d) 82, 83; Chicago & E.I.R. Co. v. Industrial Comm., 234 U.S. 296, 52 Sup. Ct. Rpt. 151; Chicago & N.W. Railway Co. v. Bolle, 284 U.S. 74, 52 Sup. Ct. Rpt. 59, 62; Pederson v. Delaware, L. & R. Co., 229 U.S. 146, 44 Sp. Ct. Rpt. 648, 57 L. Ed. 1125; Benson v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 334 Mo. 851, 69 S.W. (2d) 656, 659; De Santes v. New York M.H. & H.R. Co., 74 F. (2d) 261, 262. (c) The work Hamarstrom was doing at the time of his fatal injury affected interstate transportation by railroad too remotely to come under the Federal Act. McNatt v. Wabash Ry. Co., 335 Mo. 999, 74 S.W. (2d) 625, 627; Montgomery v. Terminal R. Ass'n of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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