Crouch v. Chicago Great Western Railroad

216 N.W. 234, 172 Minn. 447, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1303
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedOctober 28, 1927
DocketNo. 25,900.
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 216 N.W. 234 (Crouch v. Chicago Great Western Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crouch v. Chicago Great Western Railroad, 216 N.W. 234, 172 Minn. 447, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1303 (Mich. 1927).

Opinion

*448 Dibell, J.

Action by plaintiff as special administratrix of Harold N. Crouch, deceased, to recover damages for his death caused by the negligence of the defendant while he was in its employ in interstate commerce. U. S. Comp. St. §§ 8657-8665. There was a verdict for the plaintiff for $35,000, of which $20,000 was apportioned by the jury to the widow and $7,500 to each child. The defendant appeals from the order denying its alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.

It was stipulated at the trial that if there was evidence to sustain a finding that decedent’s death occurred while he was employed by the defendant in interstate commerce the court should direct the jury so to find without a submission of the question as one of fact. The court directed the jury to find that the deceased was engaged in interstate commerce. Negligence causing the death of the decedent is admitted.

There are two questions: (1) Whether the evidence sustains a finding that the deceased came to his death when in the employ of the defendant in interstate commerce; (2) whether the verdict is excessive.

The plaintiff bases her claim that the deceased was engaged in interstate commerce principally upon two theories. One is that the ten empty cars with which the deceased was working at the time he was killed were loaded at Louisville, Nebraska, consigned to the Missouri highway commission, came to St. Joseph over the Missouri Pacific, were transported by the defendant to the transfer track at Industrial City, and taken by the Savannah Intérurban and unloaded; that they were returned to St. Joseph and routed through Kansas over the Missouri Pacific to Kansas City, Missouri; and that throughout their journey the movement was interstate. The other is that the five cars came to St. Joseph in the same way as the ten; were taken by the defendant and placed upon the track for unloading; that at the transfer track were the ten empties; that to get the five loaded cars on the transfer it was necessary to go through various switching operations; that the empties were then returned to the St. Joseph yards; and that in *449 any event the work of the deceased on the ten empties was so connected with the movement of the five loaded cars, concededly interstate, that it was a part of interstate commerce.

The decedent was a member of a switching crew of the defendant at St. Joseph, Missouri. The defendant is an interstate carrier running into Missouri, Iowa, and other states. Within the yard limits of St. Joseph and about two miles north is Industrial City. At Industrial City a short track holding eight cars connects the line of the defendant with the Savannah Interurban Railway Company, and is used by the two roads for the interchanging and incidental storage of loaded and empty cars.

The Missouri Pacific Railway Company is an interstate railway traversing Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, and other states and has a line into St. Joseph. The defendant has switching yards at St. Joseph. The Missouri Pacific has none. Its switching is done under contract with the Union Terminal Company, which has yards a mile or so from those of the defendant. A track connects the two and is used for the interchange of cars.

On August 5, 1925, five coal cars owned by the Missouri Pacific and loaded with sand came over its line from Louisville, Nebraska, to St. Joseph, consigned to the Missouri state highway commission at the transfer track at Industrial City. The Union Terminal Company took charge of them at St. Joseph and later transferred them to the yards of the defendant for transportation to the transfer track at Industrial City. On the morning of August 6 a crew of the defendant took the cars to Industrial City and placed them on the transfer track. It is conceded by both parties that this was a part of an interstate movement.

It was the duty of the crew, if there were empty cars at Industrial City, to return them to the yards at St. Joseph. It had instructions to that effect on the morning of August 6. There were then eight empty cars on the transfer track at Industrial City. Four additional empty cars from the main line of the Interurban company were coupled to the eight empties. The crew opened the switch to the transfer track, coupled to the 12 empties, pulled them out on *450 the defendant’s main line, closed the switch, then moved the string of five loaded cars and 12 empties past the switch onto the. main line, disconnected the 12 empties, pulled back the five loaded cars beyond the switch, opened the switch, pushed the five loaded cars onto the transfer track and left them there. It was necessary to make these movements to get the five interstate cars on the transfer. The engine then pulled off the transfer track onto the main line, the switch ivas closed, the engine coupled to the 12 empties, and the crew started with the engine and 12 empties for St. Joseph. It was necessary to take the empties away. They were blocking the main line. The train moved but a few car lengths when an interstate train of the defendant coming from the north ran into it and the deceased was instantly killed. If there had been no collision the switching crew would have returned to the yards with the 12 empties. The switch engine being disabled, the train from. the ■north pushed them into the yards.

One of the empties was a Santa Fe car, and it was delivered to the Union Terminal Company, the representative of the Santa Fe at St. Joseph. One Avas a N. Y. C. & St. L. Ey. Co. car, and it was started toAvard home on August 7 intrastate to Drexel, Missouri. The remaining ten Avere coal cars belonging to the Missouri Pacific. They had come from Louisville, Nebraska, and had been taken to Industrial City, just as the five cars. They Avere delivered to the Union Terminal, the representative of the Missouri Pacific, put into a Missouri Pacific train, and billed on August 7 to Kansas City, Missouri. This movement carried them through Kansas.

Whether an employe is engaged in interstate commerce Avithin the meaning of the employers liability act is often a perplexing question difficult of certain determination, and it is so here. In N. Y. C. & H. R. R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 263, 35 S. Ct. 780, 59 L. ed. 1298, the court said:

“Each case must be decided in the light of the particular facts with a vieAv of determining whether, at the time of the injury, the employe is engaged in interstate business, or in an act Avhich *451 is so directly and immediately connected with such business as substantially to form a part or a necessary incident thereof.”

The ten Missouri Pacific empties had come loaded with sand and gravel to St. Joseph from Louisville, Nebraska, on the first, second, and third days of August, were delivered to the defendant for transportation to the Industrial City transfer, were delivered by it to the transfer, taken by the Interurban, unloaded and returned empty to the transfer track by the Interurban on August 6. Their movement from Louisville, Nebraska, to the transfer at Industrial City was an interstate movement like that of the five cars.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cosgriff v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.
255 F. Supp. 65 (D. Minnesota, 1966)
Hungerholt v. Land O'Lakes Creameries, Inc.
209 F. Supp. 177 (D. Minnesota, 1962)
Zahn v. Ford Motor Company
164 F. Supp. 936 (D. Minnesota, 1958)
Kessen v. Bernhardt
157 F. Supp. 652 (D. Minnesota, 1958)
Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad
68 N.W.2d 873 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1955)
Raymond v. J. R. Watkins Co.
88 F. Supp. 932 (D. Minnesota, 1950)
Giles v. Chicago Great Western Ry. Co.
72 F. Supp. 493 (D. Minnesota, 1947)
Cole v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co.
59 F. Supp. 443 (D. Minnesota, 1945)
Thoirs v. Pounsford
299 N.W. 16 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
216 N.W. 234, 172 Minn. 447, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crouch-v-chicago-great-western-railroad-minn-1927.