Wabash Railroad Company v. John Hayes, No. 843
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Van Devanter |
| Parties | WABASH RAILROAD COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. JOHN R. HAYES |
| Decision Date | 25 May 1914 |
| Docket Number | No. 843 |
v.
JOHN R. HAYES.
Page 87
Messrs. J. L. Minnis, John Maxey zane, and charles F. Morse for plaintiff in error.
Mr. James C. McShane for defendant in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 87 intentionally omitted]
Page 88
Mr. Justice Van Devanter delivered the opinion of the court:
This was an action against a railroad company to recover for a personal injury sustained by the plaintiff through the negligence of the company while he was employed as a switchman in its railroad yard in Cook county, Illinois. The action was brought in the superior court of that county, and a trial to the court and a jury resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The judgment was affirmed by the appellate court for that district (180 Ill. App. 511), which was the highest court of the state in which a decision of the case could be had, and this writ of error was then sued out by the company. By a motion to dismiss the writ our jurisdiction to review the judgment is challenged. Shortly stated, the facts bearing upon the disposition of the motion are these:
The plaintiff's declaration alleged that the injury occurred while the defendant was engaged, and while the plaintiff was employed by it, in interstate commerce. The
Page 89
other allegations were such that, with that one, they stated a good cause of action under the Federal employers' liability act (35 Stat. at L. 65, chap. 149, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1322), and, without it, they stated a good cause of action under the common law prevailing in the state. There was a plea of not guilty; and upon the trial, the proof failing to show that the injury occurred in interstate commerce, the court, at the defendant's request, instructed the jury that the Federal employers' liability act had no application to the case. Then, over the defendant's objection, the court treated the allegation respecting interstate commerce as eliminated, and submitted the case to the jury as one controlled by the common law prevailing in the state. The plaintiff recovered under that law. In the appellate court the defendant contended that, even though the allegation that the injury occurred in interstate commerce proved unwarranted, the declaration could not be treated, consistently with the Federal act, as affording any basis for a recovery under the law of the state, common or statutory. But...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Monarch v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co., No. A081178
...241, 244.) The FELA has been uniformly found to comprise "the exclusive remedy for injured railroad employees. Wabash R.R. Co. v. Hayes, 234 U.S. 86, 34 S.Ct. 729, 58 L.Ed. 1226, (1914); Janelle v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co., 524 F.2d 1259, 1261 (5th Cir.1975). FELA is worded broadly and ......
-
Renn v. Seabd. Air Line Ry, (No. 259.)
...L. R. A. (N. S.) 44, Railroad v. Wulf, 226 U. S. 570, 33 Sup. Ct. 135, 57 L. Ed. 355, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 134, and Wabash R. R. Co. v. Hayes, 234 U. S. 86, 34 Sup. Ct. 729, 58 L. Ed. 1226. In the last case the court says: "Had the injury occurred in interstate commerce, as was alleged, the fed......
-
Noice v. BNSF Ry. Co., S–1–SC–35198
...FELA provides the exclusive remedy for railroad employees injured as a result of their employers' negligence. Wabash R.R. Co. v. Hayes , 234 U.S. 86, 89, 34 S.Ct. 729, 58 L.Ed. 1226 (1914) ; Janelle v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. , 524 F.2d 1259, 1261 (5th Cir. 1975) (“[D]amages for the de......
-
Armburg v. Boston & M.R.R.
...N. E. 206, and cases there reviewed; Commonwealth v. Potter, 254 Mass. 271, 273, 150 N. E. 213. It was said in Wabash Railroad v. Hayes, 234 U. S. 86, 89, 90, 34 S. Ct. 729, 58 L. Ed. 1226: ‘Had the injury occurred in interstate commerce * * * the Federal act undoubtedly would have been con......
-
Monarch v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co., No. A081178
...241, 244.) The FELA has been uniformly found to comprise "the exclusive remedy for injured railroad employees. Wabash R.R. Co. v. Hayes, 234 U.S. 86, 34 S.Ct. 729, 58 L.Ed. 1226, (1914); Janelle v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co., 524 F.2d 1259, 1261 (5th Cir.1975). FELA is worded broadly and ......
-
Renn v. Seabd. Air Line Ry, (No. 259.)
...L. R. A. (N. S.) 44, Railroad v. Wulf, 226 U. S. 570, 33 Sup. Ct. 135, 57 L. Ed. 355, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 134, and Wabash R. R. Co. v. Hayes, 234 U. S. 86, 34 Sup. Ct. 729, 58 L. Ed. 1226. In the last case the court says: "Had the injury occurred in interstate commerce, as was alleged, the fed......
-
Noice v. BNSF Ry. Co., S–1–SC–35198
...FELA provides the exclusive remedy for railroad employees injured as a result of their employers' negligence. Wabash R.R. Co. v. Hayes , 234 U.S. 86, 89, 34 S.Ct. 729, 58 L.Ed. 1226 (1914) ; Janelle v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. , 524 F.2d 1259, 1261 (5th Cir. 1975) (“[D]amages for the de......
-
Armburg v. Boston & M.R.R.
...N. E. 206, and cases there reviewed; Commonwealth v. Potter, 254 Mass. 271, 273, 150 N. E. 213. It was said in Wabash Railroad v. Hayes, 234 U. S. 86, 89, 90, 34 S. Ct. 729, 58 L. Ed. 1226: ‘Had the injury occurred in interstate commerce * * * the Federal act undoubtedly would have been con......