McDonald v. Pgh. & Lake Erie R. R. Co.

Citation279 Pa. 26
PartiesMcDonald <I>v.</I> Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R. Co., Appellant.
Decision Date07 January 1924
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
279 Pa. 26
McDonald
v.
Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R. Co., Appellant.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
October 12, 1923.
January 7, 1924.

Page 27

Argued October 12, 1923.

Appeal, No. 131, Oct. T., 1923, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1922, No. 617, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Jacob McDonald v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad Co.

Before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., FRAZER, WALLING, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ. Affirmed.

George D. Wick, with him Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, for appellant.—Appellee was not engaged in interstate commerce at the time of the accident: New York Cent. & Hudson River R. R. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 261.

Both employees and railroad company must be engaged in interstate commerce: Shanks v. R. R., 239 U. S. 556; Illinois Cent. R. R. v. Behrens, 233 U. S. 473; Pedersen v. R. R., 229 U. S. 146.

The case of Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Strange's Adm'x., 161 S. W. R. 244, is a case exactly similar to the case at bar.

There was no evidence of negligence to take case to jury.

J. Thomas Hoffman, for appellee.—Appellee was engaged in interstate commerce at time of the accident: C., M. & St. P. v. U. S., 165 Fed. 425; Johnson v. R. R., 196 U. S. 1; Phila. & Reading R. R. v. Polk, 256 U. S. 332; Erie R. R. v. Winfield, 244 U. S. 172; Murray v. Ry., 263 Pa. 398; N. C. R. R. v. Zachary, 232 U. S. 248; Great Northern R. R. v. Otos, 239 U. S. 349; McNeil v. Director Gen., 272 Pa. 525.

Page 28

There was evidence of negligence for the jury: C., R. I. & P. R. R. v. Ward, 252 U. S. 18; Illinois Cent. R. R. v. Behrens, 233 U. S. 473; Louisville, etc., R. R. v. Stewart, 241 U. S. 261.

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE FRAZER, January 7, 1924:


Plaintiff, a freight conductor in defendant's employ, was injured by being thrown against the door of the caboose in which he was riding. The accident was due to an emergency stop of the train to avoid passing a passenger train, standing on an adjoining track at a station, receiving and discharging passengers. There are but two questions to be considered on this appeal, first, Was plaintiff, at the time he received the injury engaged in interstate commerce? and, second, Was the evidence of negligence on part of defendant sufficient to be submitted to the jury?

Plaintiff lived at Dickerson Run, Pennsylvania, and two days before the accident was ordered to take a train from that place to Youngstown, Ohio. He completed the trip at 2 p. m. the following day and was off duty until that evening, at which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Jarvis v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 31, 1931
    ......Ry. Co., 3 F.2d 988 (Certiorari denied,. 268 U.S. 704) Erie Railroad v. Welsh, 242 U.S. 303;. Ill. Cent. Ry. v. Peery, 242 U.S. ...Director Gen., 273 Pa. 375;. Koons v. Ry. Co., 271 Pa. 468; McDonald v. Railroad, 279 Pa. 26; Wabash Ry. Co. v. Whitcomb, 154 N.E. 885. ......
  • Pa. R. Co. v. Reeley, 5.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • December 18, 1940
    ...Ind.App. 190, 154 N.E. 885; Ewig v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 167 Wis. 597, 167 N.W. 442, 169 N.W. 429; McDonald v. Pittsburgh, etc., R. Co., 279 Pa. 26, 123 A. 591; Patterson v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 284 Pa. 577, 131 A. 484; O'Donnell v. Director General, 273 Pa. 375, 117 A. 82; Laughlin v. Mi......
  • Jarvis v. C., B. & Q. Railroad Co., 29248.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 31, 1931
    ...Railroad v. Halverstodt, 16 Fed. (2d) 995; O'Donnell v. Director Gen., 273 Pa. 375; Koons v. Ry. Co., 271 Pa. 468; McDonald v. Railroad, 279 Pa. 26; Wabash Ry. Co. v. Whitcomb, 154 N.E. 885. (3) The train which plaintiff and his crew were ordered to go to Ziegler and get was made up when th......
  • Dawson v. Reading Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • May 7, 1928
    ......Ry., 265 Pa. 215; McGovern. v. Ry. Co., 235 U.S. 389; Erie Ry. Co. v. Purucker, 244 U.S. 320; Engel v. Ry., 111 Neb. 21; Anderson ...213; McAvoy, Admrx., v. Phila. & Read. Ry. Co., 283 Pa. 133; McDonald v. Pgh. & Lake Erie R.R. Co., 279 Pa. 26; Sullivan v. Balt. & Ohio R.R. ......
  • 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