John C. Loan v. Southern Railway Company

Fourth Circuit

John C. Loan v. Southern Railway Company

344 F.2d 701, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5843

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 20, 1965

Docket9804

StatusPublished

This text of 344 F.2d 701 (John C. Loan v. Southern Railway Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

John C. Loan v. Southern Railway Company, 344 F.2d 701, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5843 (4th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John C. Loan, a railroad fireman, brought an action against his employer, Southern Railway Co., under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act. He alleged in his complaint that the defendant negligently caused him to slip and fall by leaving metal rods on a step leading to the cab of an engine in which he was working. The case was heard by a jury and a verdict was rendered for the defendant.

The charge to the jury was adequate and there was sufficient evidence offered to support its verdict. The testimony of Loan’s ex-wife, even if privileged, was merely cumulative. Independent witnesses abundantly established the facts testified to by the wife. The error of receiving her testimony, if it was error, was not in our opinion sufficient in the entire context of the trial to warrant reversal.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

John C. Loan, a railroad fireman, brought an action against his employer, Southern Railway Co., under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act. He alleged in his complaint that the defendant negligently caused him to slip and fall by leaving metal rods on a step leading to the cab of an engine in which he was working. The case was heard by a jury and a verdict was rendered for the defendant.

The charge to the jury was adequate and there was sufficient evidence offered to support its verdict. The testimony of Loan’s ex-wife, even if privileged, was merely cumulative. Independent witnesses abundantly established the facts testified to by the wife. The error of receiving her testimony, if it was error, was not in our opinion sufficient in the entire context of the trial to warrant reversal.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 F.2d 701, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-c-loan-v-southern-railway-company-ca4-1965.