St Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Delk
Decision Date | 27 June 1908 |
Docket Number | 1,747. |
Citation | 162 F. 145 |
Parties | ST. LOUIS & S.F.R. CO. v. DELK. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Before LURTON, SEVERENS, and RICHARDS, Circuit Judges.
Motion to rehear denied.
RICHARDS, Circuit Judge (dissenting). Although no opinion has been handed down upon the denial of the motion, I think for certain reasons I ought to state the grounds I dissent from it. This case was decided March 3, 1908, and I dissented then, stating my grounds. Subsequently, on May 18, 1908, the Supreme Court of the United States decided the case of St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. v. Taylor, Adm'x, 28 Sup.Ct. 616, 52 L.Ed. . . . ; Mr. Justice Moody delivering the opinion. In the course of the opinion it became necessary for the court to express its view of the operation and obligation of the safety appliance law, and it stated that, in enacting the law:
This was the view taken by the court below, and I could not do other than dissent from this court reversing the judgment because of action based on it.
I dissent now for the purpose of pointing out that while the case has been sent back to grant a new trial, to be conducted in accordance with the contrary view taken by this court of the effect of the act, seemingly such view is inconsistent with the one announced since by the Supreme Court.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company v. York
...conveniently at another place does not justify its being moved in a defective condition. 169 F. 372; 71 Ark. 445; 83 Ark. 591; 86 Ark. 244; 162 F. 145; Id. 403. It the duty of one desiring a more specific instruction to request one in proper form. 88 Ark. 225. If the employees constantly an......
-
Park, Grant, & Morris v. Nordale
...Philadelphia Fire Asso. v. Love (Tex.) 108 S.W. 158, 810; Waldron v. Taylor (W. Va.) 45 S.E. 336; St. Louis etc. Co. v. Delk, 158 F. 931, 162 F. 145; Clark v. Kansas City etc. Co. (Mo.) 118 S.W. 40; parte Pittman (Nev.) 99 P. 700; Com. v. Jonger, 21 Pa. S.Ct. 217; Walker v. Vicksburg etc. C......
-
Roxford Knitting Co. v. Moore & Tierney, Inc.
... ... construed with reference to the object intended to be ... accomplished by it, United States v. Musgrave (D.C.) ... 160 F. 700, St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Delk, 162 F. 145, 89 ... C.C.A. 169; that the spirit or reason of the law will prevail ... over its letter, Holy Trinity Church ... ...