Hayman v. Southern Pac. Co., No. 44266

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtHYDE
Citation278 S.W.2d 749
PartiesHarold HAYMAN (Plaintiff) Appellant, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a Corporation (Defendant) Respondent
Docket NumberNo. 44266,No. 1
Decision Date11 April 1955

Page 749

278 S.W.2d 749
Harold HAYMAN (Plaintiff) Appellant,
v.
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a Corporation (Defendant) Respondent.
No. 44266.
Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.
April 11, 1955.
Motion for Rehearing or to Transfer to Court en Banc Denied
May 9, 1955.

Page 750

Ralph L. Markus, St. Louis, Charles E. Gray, St. Louis, for appellant.

George E. Lee, Doris J. Banta, St. Louis, Carter, Bull & Baer, St. Louis, of counsel, for respondent.

HYDE, Judge.

Action for $137,500 damages for personal injuries under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.A. Secs. 51-60. Verdict and judgment were for plaintiff for $72,847.96. However, the Court sustained defendant's motion to set aside the verdict and judgment and entered judgment for defendant dismissing the action on the ground that defendant was not subject to service of process in this state. In the alternative the Court ordered judgment entered for defendant on the ground that plaintiff was not entitled to recover because of releases given by him. In the alternative also, in case its orders entering judgment for defendant were reversed, the Court sustained defendant's new trial on the grounds that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence; that there was error in two instructions; and that the verdict was so grossly excessive as to show bias and prejudice. Plaintiff has appealed.

Our conclusion is that the Court's ruling on the first alternative was correct and that defendant is not subject to suit in this state in this action. Plaintiff relies mainly on International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95. However, the situation in that case was very different from the one presented here.

The material facts on this issue shown by the evidence on defendant's motion to quash were as hereinafter stated. Plaintiff, a resident of this state, was injured in California in 1949 while riding on the tender of one of defendant's trains, and serving as a brakeman, running between Tracy and Fresno. Defendant, a Delaware corporation, is not licensed to do business in Missouri, does not own or operate any railroad lines, railroad equipment, warehouses or any of the usual facilities of railroads in this state, and does not own any real estate in this state. Its closest lines were in Louisiana, Texas and Utah. Pullman cars from defendant's trains were brought to St. Louis by other railroads; and its freight cars were moved into this state by other railroad companies under the terms of standard bill of lading contract terms prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Defendant had an office in St. Louis (which had been there about 15 years) in charge of a General Agent for the territory of Illinois, Iowa and Missouri. This office was listed in the telephone directory under defendant's name. There were eleven people in the office. (Defendant also had a similar office in Kansas City with nine employees, the activities of which are substantially the same.) Defendant owned the office equipment used with an assessed valuation for taxation of $270. The office space was leased for five years. The work of the St.

Page 751

Louis office was the solicitation of freight and passenger business over defendant's lines, 'quoting rates, tracing shipments, advising industry the most expeditious manner to move their shipments.' The office did not issue bills of lading; this was done by the local originating carrier where the shipment started. Collection of freight accounts also was handled by the initial lines although defendant's office would occasionally handle one as an 'accommodation to a customer who cannot accomplish it otherwise.' Claims for loss or damage were not handled by the St. Louis office. For passengers, the office made reservations and sold tickets for travel solely on defendant's lines; and also arranged for and delivered tickets for travel on other railroads, which included travel on defendant's lines. These tickets were made out in the offices of the railroads with which the travel started. (For travel exclusively on its own lines the annual average was about $6,000 and for travel in connection with other lines about $38,000.) Freight shipments credited to the St. Louis Agency from the three states were in excess of 58,000 car loads in 1950 and in 1951. (1948-1949 about 48,000 cars.) All bills were sent to San Francisco and paid by vouchers drawn there. No checks were written in the St. Louis office and no contracts were made there. Money received in the St. Louis office was deposited in defendant's account in the First National Bank of St. Louis but the General Agent in charge of that office had no authority to draw on it. See also statement of facts in Doyle v. Southern Pacific Co., D.C., 87 F.Supp. 974. Service of summons in this case was under Sec. 506.150(3) (statutory references are to RSMo and V.A.M.S.) applying to domestic or foreign corporations.

Since this action is under the Federal Act, plaintiff considers that the right to sue defendant here is a Federal right, citing 45 U.S.C.A. Sec. 56. Plaintiff emphasizes the part of the second sentence of Sec. 56 giving the right to sue in the district 'in which the defendant shall be doing business at the time of commencing such action.' However, this sentence refers to suits in the United States District Courts and is not applicable here. The next sentence of Sec. 56 makes the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts concurrent with that of State Courts in actions under the Act; but while such actions in State Courts are authorized, the 'Act * * * does not purport to require State Courts to entertain suits arising under it'....

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Morrow v. Caloric Appliance Corp., No. 49885
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 11, 1963
    ...so as to make it amenable to personal service were reviewed and concisely stated in the case of Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., Mo., 278 S.W.2d 749. In that case plaintiff, a brakeman on defendant's railroad, was injured while riding on one of defendant's trains in the State of California. ......
  • Collar v. Peninsular Gas Co., No. 45137
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 12, 1956
    ...ex rel. Mills Automatic Merchandising Corp. v. Hogan, supra, 103 S.W.2d 495, 497. See also, Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., Mo.Sup., 278 S.W.2d 749, and Pucci v. Blatz Brewing Co., D.C., 127 F.Supp. 747. As stated, it is necessary that the foreign corporation be engaged in transacting some ......
  • Sexton v. Jenkins & Associates, Inc., No. SC 85803.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 7, 2004
    ...was "without prejudice" — but only as to Sexton's right to proceed in the proper forum. Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., 278 S.W.2d 749 (Mo.1955). Sexton is not barred from pursuing his claim in the proper forum — the Labor and Industrial Conclusion The judgment is affirmed. WHITE,......
3 cases
  • Morrow v. Caloric Appliance Corp., No. 49885
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 11, 1963
    ...so as to make it amenable to personal service were reviewed and concisely stated in the case of Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., Mo., 278 S.W.2d 749. In that case plaintiff, a brakeman on defendant's railroad, was injured while riding on one of defendant's trains in the State of California. ......
  • Collar v. Peninsular Gas Co., No. 45137
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 12, 1956
    ...ex rel. Mills Automatic Merchandising Corp. v. Hogan, supra, 103 S.W.2d 495, 497. See also, Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., Mo.Sup., 278 S.W.2d 749, and Pucci v. Blatz Brewing Co., D.C., 127 F.Supp. 747. As stated, it is necessary that the foreign corporation be engaged in transacting some ......
  • Sexton v. Jenkins & Associates, Inc., No. SC 85803.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 7, 2004
    ...was "without prejudice" — but only as to Sexton's right to proceed in the proper forum. Hayman v. Southern Pacific Co., 278 S.W.2d 749 (Mo.1955). Sexton is not barred from pursuing his claim in the proper forum — the Labor and Industrial Conclusion The judgment is affirmed. WHITE,......

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