Central Vermont Railway Co. v. White

Citations

• 238 U.S. 507
• 35 S. Ct. 865
• 59 L. Ed. 1433
• 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1583

Syllabus

<p>The filing of a large number of assignments of error perverts the purpose of the rule requiring assignments, and the practice cannot be approved. Phillips v. Seymour, 91 U. S. 648.</p> <p>On writ of error to review a judgment of the* state court in an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, this court considers only assignments relating to matters of practice, pleading and evidence involving the construction of the Federal statute.</p> <p>It was not error in the trial court to refuse to direct a verdict for defendant on the ground that the proof failed to show negligence in allowing a faster freight train to run into a slower train in front of it, the engineer of the former having received notice that the track was clear and that it might proceed. The-evidenc.e was sufficient to support a verdict.</p> <p>The Federal Employers’ Liability Act abolishes the fellow servant rule and an employé does not assume risks arising from unknown defects in engines, machinery or appliances.</p> <p>While matters of procedure depend upon the law of the place where the suit is brought, matters of substance in regard to an action based on a Federal statute depend upon the statute; and in an action under the Employers’ Liability Act the burden of proof as to whether the employé was guilty of contributory negligence is a matter of substance and not of mere state procedure.</p> <p>The Federal courts have uniformly held that as a matter of general law the burden of proving contributory negligence is on the defendant, and have enforced the principle even .in States which hold, as does Vermont, that the burden is on the plaintiff of proving that he was not guilty thereof.</p> <p>In passing the Federal Employers’ Liability Act Congress intended that it should be construed in the light of the decisions of the Federal courts made prior to the enactment in this respect.</p> <p>In an action under the Employers’ Liability Act rulings of the state court in regard to the effect of amen