Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

379 U.S. 671, 85 S. Ct. 636, 13 L. Ed. 2d 594, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 1962
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedFebruary 1, 1965
Docket560
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 379 U.S. 671 (Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 379 U.S. 671, 85 S. Ct. 636, 13 L. Ed. 2d 594, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 1962 (1965).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the Maryland Court of Appeals is reversed.

In this action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U. S. C. § 51 et seq., the petitioner was awarded damages by a jury in the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The Court of Appeals held that the issue of employer negligence should not have been submitted to the jury and that the trial court erred in denying the motions of the railroad for a directed verdict and for a judgment n. o. v., 235 Md. 568, 202 A. 2d 348.

The petitioner worked, for the railroad as a tallyman and trucker at its Locust Point terminal in Baltimore City. His foreman directed him to find some boxes of merchandise. While working on this assignment near an [672]*672open elevator shaft he fell into the shaft and one of the railroad’s forklift trucks fell in on top of him. The crucial fact question in the case concerned the forklift truck. There was testimony that the petitioner had mounted the truck and backed it into the shaft. There was also evidence, however, which, if believed by the jury, would support a finding that the operator assigned to use the truck .negligently left it unattended, and that it rolled toward the petitioner, either because it was not secured or because it was set in motion by an unauthorized third person, and struck petitioner in the back, propelling him into the shaft. In these circumstances, the Court of Appeals improperly invaded the function and province of the jury. Rogers v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 352 U. S. 500; Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 372 U. S. 108.

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

Related

Norfolk Southern Railway Corp. v. Tiller
944 A.2d 1272 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2008)
CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Miller
858 A.2d 1025 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2004)
Wilson v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company
804 F.2d 607 (Tenth Circuit, 1986)
Wilson v. Burlington Northern Railroad
804 F.2d 607 (Tenth Circuit, 1986)
Moss v. Central of Georgia Railroad
219 S.E.2d 593 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Catania v. Halcyon Steamship Co.
44 Cal. App. 3d 348 (California Court of Appeal, 1975)
Kelley v. Union Pacific Railroad
481 P.2d 56 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1971)
Pehowic v. Erie Lackawanna Railroad
430 F.2d 697 (Third Circuit, 1970)
Vaiarella v. James F. Shanahan Corp.
224 N.E.2d 454 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1967)
Smith v. Union Oil Co.
241 Cal. App. 2d 338 (California Court of Appeal, 1966)
Davis v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
379 U.S. 671 (Supreme Court, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
379 U.S. 671, 85 S. Ct. 636, 13 L. Ed. 2d 594, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 1962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-baltimore-ohio-railroad-scotus-1965.