Price v. Pennsylvania Co

Decision Date26 January 1885
Citation28 L.Ed. 980,113 U.S. 218,5 S.Ct. 427
PartiesPRICE and others v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

A statute of Pennsylvania, passed in 1851, makes the provision, now become common, for a recovery by the widow or children of a person whose death was caused by the negligence of another of damages for the loss of the deceased.

A statute passed April 4, 1868, provides that 'where any person shall sustain personal injury or loss of life while lawfully engaged or employed on or about the road, works, depot, and premises of a railroad company, or in or about any train or car therein or thereon, of which company such person is not an employe, the right of action or recovery in all such cases against the company shall be such only as would exist if such person were an employe: provided, that this section shall not apply to passengers.' The plaintiff in error sued the defendant in for the loss of her husband by a death which the jury, by the following special verdict, found to be caused by the negligence of the company's servant or servants:

'We find for the plaintiff in the sum of ($5,000) five thousand dollars, subject to the opinion of the court on the question of law reserved, to-wit: We find that A. J. Price at the time of his death was route agent of the United States post-office department, duly appointed and commissioned, his route being on the Western Pennsylvania Railroad from Allegheny City to Blairsville, in the state of Pennsylvania; that his duties as such agent required him to be on the mail car on the mail train of said road to receive and deliver mail matter; that for the purpose of his business and that of the postal department, and in accordance with the laws of the United States and the regulations of the post-office department, and acceptance thereof by the railroad company, one end of the baggage car on the mail train was divided off and fitted up for the use of the department in carrying the mails, and that the duties of the said route agent required him to be in said room in the car during the running of the train; that said Price was daily on said train, making a round trip from Allegheny City to Blairsville and return; that on the twenty-third day of July, 1877, while at his post in his room on said car, Mr. Price was killed in a collision of the mail train coming west with another train of the defendant company going east; that said collision was caused by the negligence or misconduct of the conductor and engineer in charge of the train going east in neglecting or disobeying orders, and in failing to take necessary precaution to avoid a collision.

'We find that the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, by resolution dated April 16, 1868, accepted the provisions of the act of assembly, approved fourth April, 1868, (P. L. p. 59,) and that [at the] time of the collision the ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Buck v. Kuykendall
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • 7 Enero 1924
    ... ... 927, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 997; ... Dickey v. Turnpike Co., 7 Dana (Ky.) 113; ... Searight v. Stokes, 3 How. 151, 11 L.Ed. 537; ... Price v. Pennsylvania R.R., 113 U.S. 221, 5 Sup.Ct ... 427, 28 L.Ed. 980; St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph ... Co., 148 U.S. 92, 13 Sup.Ct. 485, ... ...
  • Yarrington v. Delaware & Hudson Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • 29 Enero 1906
    ... 143 F. 565 YARRINGTON v. DELAWARE & HUDSON CO. No. 31. United States Circuit Court, M.D. Pennsylvania. January 29, 1906 ... Syllabus by the Court ... The ... construction given by the highest court of a state to the ... By ... reason of the local Pennsylvania act of April 4, 1868 (P.L ... 58), as construed in Railroad v. Price, 96 Pa. 256, ... although contrary to the great weight of authority elsewhere, ... a railway mail clerk is not a passenger, and according to the ... ...
  • Lusk v. Wilkes
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 9 Enero 1917
    ...of a duty owed by the plaintiff to his employer to guard the mail in the course of transfer. In the case of Price v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 113 U.S. 218, 5 S. Ct. 427. 28 L. Ed. 980, the court says:"The person thus to be carried with the mail matter, without extra charge, is no more a pass......
  • Lusk v. Wilkes
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 9 Enero 1918
    ... ... his employer to guard the mail in the course of transfer. In ... the case of Price v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 113 ... U.S. 218, 5 S.Ct. 427, 28 L.Ed. 980, the court says: ... "The person thus to be carried with the mail matter, ... ...
  • 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