US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

PENNSYLVANIA CO. V. DONAT, 239 U. S. 50 (1915)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 239 U. S. 50 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Pennsylvania Co. v. Donat, 239 U.S. 50 (1915)

Pennsylvania Co. v. Donat

No. 54

Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted October 18, 1915

Decided November 1, 1915

239 U.S. 50




In an action based on the Employers' Liability Act, the trial court properly submitted to the jury for its determination whether, on the facts shown in regard to movement of cars coming from without the state, the plaintiff was or was not engaged in interstate commerce, and chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 239 U. S. 51

properly refused to charge that he was not so engaged, and therefor could not recover.

A writ of error to review such a judgment is so frivolous as not to need further argument, and a motion to affirm must be granted under § 5 of Rule 6.

224 F.1d 21 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the duty of this Court in the case of a frivolous appeal in a case under the Employers' Liability Act, are stated in the opinion.

Memorandum opinion by MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS, by direction of the court:

The question presented upon this writ of error is "so frivolous as not to need further argument," and the motion to affirm the judgment below must be granted. (Rule 6, § 5.)

Basing his claim upon the Employers' Liability Act of April 22, 1908, c. 149, 35 Stat. 65, Marion Donat began the original action in the United States District Court for Indiana against the Pennsylvania Company, a carrier by railroad, to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered by him while employed as a yard conductor. The trial court refused a request to charge that he was not engaged in interstate commerce when the accident occurred, and therefore could not recover. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 239 U. S. 52

This refusal is the sole ground upon which error is now asserted.

Two loaded coal cars coming from without the state were received in the carrier's yard at Fort Wayne, Indiana. They were destined to Olds' private switch track connecting with the yard, and, acting under instructions, Donat commenced the switching movement requisite to place them thereon. There was evidence tending to show that, in order to complete this movement, it became necessary to uncouple the engine from the loaded cars and with it to remove two empty ones from the private track. While engaged about the removal, defendant in error was injured. The trial court submitted to the jury for determination whether he was engaged in interstate commerce at the time of the injury, and, in approving such action (224 F.1d 21), the circuit court of appeals was clearly right. N.Y. Central & Hudson River R. Co. v. Carr, 238 U. S. 260, 238 U. S. 262-263.


ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™