PENNSYLVANIA COMPANY
v.
DONAT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Marion Donat sued the Pennsylvania Company under the Employers' Liability Act to recover damages for injuries sustained while working as a yard conductor, and the railroad argued he was not engaged in interstate commerce and therefore ineligible to recover. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' decisions that the question of whether Donat was engaged in interstate commerce was properly submitted to the jury, finding the railroad's argument frivolous and establishing that such factual determinations regarding interstate commerce status belong with the jury rather than being decided as matters of law.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Memorandum opinion by
Mr. Justice McReynolds,
by direction of the court.
The question presented upon this writ of error is “so frivolous as not to need further argument,” and the motion to affirm the judgment below must be granted. (Rule 6, § 5.)
Basing his claim upon the Employers’ Liability Act of April '22, 1908, c. 149, 35 Stat. 65, Marion Donat began the original action in the United States District Court for Indiana against the Pennsylvania Company, a carrier by railroad, to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered by him while employed as a yard conductor. The trial court refused a request to charge that he was not engaged in interstate commerce when the accident occurred and therefore could not re cover. This refusal is the sole ground upon which error is now asserted.
Two loaded coal cars coming from without the State were received in the carrier’s yard at Fort Wayne, Indiana. They were destined to Olds’ private switch-track connecting with the yard; and acting under instructions Donat commenced the switching movement requisite to place them thereon. There was evidence tending to show that in order to complete this movement it became necessary to uncouple the engine from the loaded cars and with it to remove two empty ones from the private track. While engaged about the removal defendant in error was injured: The trial court submitted to the jury for determination whether he was engaged in interstate commerce at the time of the injury, and in approving such action (224 Fed. Rep. 1021) the Circuit Court of Appeals was clearly right. N. Y. Cent. & Hudson River R. R. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 262-263.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Middleton v. Tex. Power & Light Co., 249 U.S. 152 (U.S. 1919)…a & Western R. R. Co., 229 U. S. 146, 151-152; North Carolina R. R. Co. v. Zachary, 232 U. S. 248, 259-260; Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Behrens, 233 U. S. 473, 478; New York Central R. R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 263; Pennsylvania Co. v. Donat, 239 U. S. 50; Shanks v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., 239 U. S. 556, 559; Louisville & Nash. R. R. Co. v. Parker, 242 U. S. 13; Erie R. R. Co. v. Welsh, 242 U. S. 303, 306; Southern Ry. Co. v. Puckett, 244 U. S. 571, 573), reasonably may .have led th…
-
S. Ry. Co. v. Puckett, 244 U.S. 571 (U.S. 1917)…the operation the character of interstate commerce. The case is controlled by Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., 229 U. S. 146, 152; New York Central & Hudson River R. R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 263; Pennsylvania Co. v. Donat, 239 U. S. 50; Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. v. Parker, 242 U. S. 13. Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., supra, holds that a workman employed in maintaining interstate tracks in proper condition while they are in use is employed in interstat…
-
Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Parker, 242 U.S. 13 (U.S. 1916)…aracter, as in Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Behrens, 233 U. S. 473, 478, and doing the act for [*15] the purpose of furthering the later work. See New York Central & Hudson River R. R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 263. Pennsylvania Company v. Donat, 239 U. S. 50. Kalem Co. v. Harper Bros., 222 U. S. 55, 62, 63. But it is necessary to see how the case was dealt with in the trial court. The Railroad Company did not ask to go to the jury on the question whether the deceased was engaged in interstate commerce.…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- N.Y. Cent. & Hudson River R.R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U.S. 260 (U.S. 1915)