CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY
v.
GAINEY, ADMINISTRATOR OF DWYER
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.
A widow brought suit under the federal Employers' Liability Act to recover damages for her husband's death caused by railroad negligence while he was in interstate commerce. The Supreme Court reversed the Kentucky Court of Appeals' affirmation of a $16,000 verdict, holding that the lower court's method of calculating damages was erroneous because it failed to account for the principle that damages should not exceed the actual pecuniary loss the widow would have suffered, rather than treating the entire loss as occurring at the time of death without discount.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Pitney delivered the opinion of the court.
This was an action under the Employers’ Liability Act of Congress of April 22, 1908, as amended April 5, 1910 (c. 149, 35 Stat. 65; c. 143, 36 Stat. 291). It was brought to recover damages for the death of Richard Dwyer, caused by the negligence of the railroad company, while he was in its employ in interstate commerce. The sole beneficiary was decedent's widow, who originally qualified as administratrix and brought the action, but has died since the allowance of the present writ of error. Laying aside a contention based upon the Seventh Amendment to the Federal Constitution, which has been disposed of in Minneapolis & St. Louis R. R. v. Bombolis, ante, p. 211, the only question raised relates to the method adopted in ascertaining the damages.
The jury returned a verdict for $16,000.
On appeal to the Kentucky Court of Appeals it was insisted that this amount was grossly excessive, and was the result of erroneous instructions to the jury. It was contended that the verdict of $16,000 if placed at interest would yield an annual income greater than the amount the widow would have received had she lived, and would yet leave her the principal to dispose of at the time of her death. The court overruled this contention, on the authority of Ches. & Ohio Ry. v. Kelly’s Admx., 160 Kentucky, 296, where the same court held that in such a case the whole loss is sustained at the time of intestate’s death, and is to be included in the verdict without rebate or discount. A reading of the opinion of the Court of Appeals in the present case (162 Kentucky, 427) makes it evident that it was only upon this theory that the court was able to reach a conclusion sustaining the verdict. Since we have held, in Ches. & Ohio Ry. v. Kelly, Admx., this day decided, ante, p. 485, that the theory is erroneous, it results that the judgment here under review must be
Reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fairmount Glass Works v. CUB Fork Coal Co., 287 U.S. 474 (U.S. 1933)…33 U. S. 80; or was less than an amount undisputed, Glenwood Irrigation Co. v. Vallery, 248 Fed. 483; Stetson v. Stindt, 279 Fed. 209; or was in pursuance [*484] of erroneous instructions on the measure of damages, Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. Gainey, 241 U. S. 494, 496;10 or was in clear contravention of the instructions of the trial court, United Press Assn. v. National Newspapers Assn., 254 Fed. 284; compare American R. Co. v. Santiago, 9 F. (2d) 753, 757-758. To regard the verdict as inconsistent on its f…
-
Mellon v. Goodyear, 277 U.S. 335 (U.S. 1928)…an recover only pecuniary damages. American Railroad Co. of Porto Rico v. Didricksen, 227 U. S. 145, 149; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. McGinnis, 228 U. S. 173; C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Kelly, Admx., 241 U. S. 485; C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Gainey, Admr., 241 U. S. 494; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Moser, 275 U. S. 133. Neither statute defines the nature of the damages to be recovered; this was left for interpretation; We followed the construction' given the earlier one when it became necessary to interpre…
-
Gulf v. Moser, 275 U.S. 133 (U.S. 1927)…the testimony in this case.” , This action sufficed to raise the point now presented. Refusal to grant the request was material error. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company v. Kelly, 241 U. S. 485, 491, and Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company v. Gainey, 241 U. S. 494, announce the applicable rule. [*136] In the first, we distinctly stated that “ in computing the damages recoverable for the deprivation of future benefits, the principle of limiting the recovery to compensation requires that adequate allowance be m…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Skaggs, 240 U.S. 66 (U.S. 1916)