Winfield v. Erie R. Co.
| Decision Date | 06 January 1916 |
| Citation | 88 N.J.Law 619,96 A. 394 |
| Parties | WINFIELD v. ERIE R. CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Amy L. Winfield against the Erie Railroad Company. A judgment in favor of the petitioner was reversed by the Supreme Court on certiorari, and the petitioner appeals. Reversed.
Harry Lane, of Jersey City, for appellant. Clement K. Corbin, of Jersey City, for appellee.
GUMMERE, C. J. Mrs. Winfield, the appellant, instituted proceedings in the Hudson county court of common pleas, under the Workmen's Compensation Act of 1911, to have compensation awarded to her for the death of her husband, which resulted from an accident occurring in the course of his employment with the defendant company, and which arose out of that employment. Her claim for such compensation was based upon the second section of the statute, which provides that:
"When employer and employé shall by agreement, either express or implied, as hereinafter provided, accept the provisions of section 2 of this act, compensation for personal injuries to or for the death of such employé by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment shall be made by the employer without regard to the negligence of the employer, according to the schedule" set forth in the act.
The defendant company set up, as a bar to her right to proceed under the state statute, that at the time of the accident it was engaged in commerce between and among the several states and territories of the United States, and the petitioner's decedent was employed by it in such commerce, and that therefore the legal rights of the petitioner and obligations of the defendant were to be determined exclusively by the act of Congress of the United States entitled "An act relating to the liability of common carriers by railroad to their employés in certain cases," approved April 22, 1908, and the amendments thereto and supplements thereof. U. S. Comp. St. 1913, §§ 8657-8665.
When the matter came on to be heard, the common pleas court held, on the evidence submitted, that the petitioner's decedent was not employed by the defendant in interstate commerce at the time of the accident which caused his death, and that consequently the federal statute had no application. It thereupon proceeded to fix the petitioner's compensation in accordance with the schedule provided by the state statute, and judgment was entered accordingly.
The defendant company sued out a writ of certiorari to review the validity of the judgment so entered, and the Supreme Court, upon the return of the writ, held the finding of the lower court that decedent at the time of his death was not employed by the defendant in interstate commerce to be erroneous, that the contrary was shown to be the fact, and that therefore the federal Employers' Liability Act of 1908 governed the right of the petitioner to obtain...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bendler v. Bendler
...Telegraph Co., 84 N.J.L. 85, 86 A. 451 (Sup.Ct. 1913), affirmed 86 N.J.L. 701, 91 A. 1070 (E. & A. 1914); Winfield v. Erie Railroad Co., 88 N.J.L. 619, 96 A. 394 (E. & A. 1916); Troth v. Millville Bottle Works, 89 N.J.L. 219, 98 A. 435 (E. & A. 1916); Steinmetz v. Snead & Co., 123 N.J.L. 49......
-
Stellas v. W. Union Tel. Co., Inc.
...but a contractual obligation created by the Compensation Act with the consent of both the employer and employe. Winfield v. Erie Railroad Co., 88 N.J.L. 619, 96 A. 394, reversed on other grounds 244 U.S. 170, 37 S.Ct. 556, 61 L.Ed. 1057, Ann.Cas.1918B, 662; Foley v. Home Rubber Co., "It is ......
-
Des Moines Union Ry. Co. v. Funk
...Liability Act covers liability arising from the negligence of the carrier only. The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in Winfield v. Erie R. Co., 88 N.J.L. 619 (96 A. 394), held that, where the Federal Act affords no remedy,--that where the injury occurs under such circumstances that no liabilit......
-
Ellamar Mining Co. of Alaska v. Possus
... ... out of contractual obligation, and which exists irrespective ... of the defendant's negligence. Winfield v. Erie R ... Co., 88 N.J.Law, 619, 96 A. 394. In Madden's Case, ... 222 Mass. 487, 496, 111 N.E. 379, 383, L.R.A. 1916D, 1000, it ... ...