KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
v.
JONES, ADMINISTRATOR
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 railroad employee was killed by a train while working as a car inspector, and his administratrix sued the railroad under the Employers' Liability Act based on a theory that the employee was so absorbed in inspecting cars that he failed to hear an approaching train because the engine bell was not rung. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment, holding that the evidence was insufficient to support a verdict of railroad negligence, as there was merely speculation that the employee was engaged in inspection work at the time, and the circumstances suggested the employee's own negligence was the more probable cause of death.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is an action under the Employers’ Liability Act for the death of one R. D. Ferguson, who was a car inspector on the petitioner’s road. No one saw the death, but the body was found between the main track and a parallel track, and the probability is that Ferguson was killed by a train going north on the former. A freight train was being made up on the parallel track, and the hypothesis of the respondent, supported by little if anything except the place where the body and the lantern of the deceased were found, is that Ferguson was engaged in inspecting the cars, and so absorbed in his work that he did not hear the approaching train, but was relying upon the ringing of the engine bell, which usually was rung but which the respondent’s witness say was not rung on this occasion. The Court below sustained the verdict on this, ground. Ferguson was seen not later than a quarter before seven in the evening, so far as time can be fixed. The train passed at five minutes after seven,, the time at which it was known by him to be due. His body was found at twenty-five minutes after seven. He was an experienced man. The indications are that there was nothing for him to inspect at the probable time of his death. At best it is a mere guess that he was so engaged, still more that he was absorbed in such work. The main track was straight and the train was making a great noise and showing a bright light as it approached. Nothing except imagination and sympathy warranted a finding that the death was due to the negligence of the petitioner rather than to that of the man himself. It is unnecessary to consider whether if the case for the plaintiff were stronger the principle of Chesapeake &. Ohio Ry. Co. v. Nixon, 271 U. S. 218, would apply.
Judgment reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 U.S. 521 (U.S. 1957)…intiff reversed. Gulf, M. & N. R. Co. v. Wells, 275 U. S. 455; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Toledo, St. L. & W. R. Co. v. Allen, 276 U. S. 165; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Kansas City Southern R. Co. v. Jones, 276 U. S. 303; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Leitch, 276 U. S. 429; affirmance of judgment for plaintiff reversed. [*554] 1928 Term. Unadilla Valley R. Co. v. Caldine, 278 U. S. 139; affirmance of judgment for plaintif…
-
S. Ry. Co. v. Walters, 284 U.S. 190 (U.S. 1931)…on the issue whether the train was stopped before crossing Bond Avenue was so insubstantial and insufficient that it did not justify a submission of that issue to the jury. Gulf M. & N. R. Co. v. Wells, 275 U. S. 455; Kansas C. S. Ry. Co. v. Jones, 276 U. S. 303; New York Central R. Co. v. Ambrose, 280 U. S. 486; Gunning v. Cooley, 281 U. S. 90, 93; Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Toops, 281 U. S. 351. There is no proof whatever that the alleged failure to stop before entering the crossing was the proximat…
-
The NEW York v. DOX, 249 F.2d 572 (1st Cir. 1957)…147, 45 S.Ct. 33, 69 L.Ed. 212; Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Groeger, 1925, 266 U.S. 521, 45 S.Ct. 169, 69 L.Ed. 419; Missouri Pacific R. R. Co. v. Aeby, 1928, 275 U.S. 426, 48 S.Ct. 177, 72 L.Ed. 351; Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Jones, 1928, 276 U.S. 303, 48 S.Ct. 308, 72 L.Ed. 583; Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co. v. Davis, 1929, 279 U.S. 34, 49 S.Ct. 210, 73 L.Ed. 601; Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Mihas, 1929, 280 U.S. 102, 50 S.Ct. 42, 74 L.Ed. 207; Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Chamberlain, 1933, 288…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Nixon, 271 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1926)
- The Kan. City S. Ry. Co. v. Jones, 275 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1927)