Allen v. Tuscarora Valley Railroad

Citations

• 229 Pa. 97
• 78 A. 34
• 1910 Pa. LEXIS 557

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Railroads—Brakeman—Coupling cars — Act of congress of March 2, 1898 — Practice, C. P. — Amendment to statement — New cause of action — Assumption of risk — Statute of limitations.</p> <p>1. In an action brought by a brakeman against a railroad for injuries received while coupling cars, where the original statement was at common law and alleged that the injuries resulted from the negligence of the defendant company in using a coupler more dangerous than the usual coupling employed on railroads, an amendment to the statement four years later alleging that the railroad was engaged in interstate commerce and its cars were equipped with couplers in violation of the act of congress of March 2, 1893, c. 196, see. 2, 27 Statutes at Large, 531, making it unlawful for a common carrier to employ cars in interstate traffic not equipped with couplers coupling automatically by impact and providing that any employee injured by a car or train not so equipped shall not be deemed to have assumed the risk thereby occasioned introduces a new and different cause of action and is subject to the statute of limitations.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Pleading—New cause of action — Departure—Departure from, law to law — Common law — Statutory law.</p> <p>2. A departure in pleading may be either in the substance of the action or defense, or the law on which it is founded.</p> <p>3. A change from the assertion of a cause of action arising under the common or general law to a reliance upon a statute giving a particular or exceptional right constitutes a departure in law.</p>