Hayman v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.
Citations
- 214 Pa. 436
- 63 A. 967
- 1906 Pa. LEXIS 676
Syllabus
<p>Negligence — Railroads—Master and servant — Fellow servant — Act of April 4, 1868, P. L. 58.</p> <p>Under the Act of April 4, 1868, P. L. 58, there are two classes of cases. The first class includes those cases where the place of accident was for general purposes the premises of the railroad company. In such cases the person injured is within the act if he is “lawfuffy engaged or employed on or about” them and is not a passenger. The other class is where the accident occurs in a place which is not exclusively and for general purposes, but only within a limited and statutory sense, the premises of the raüroad company. In this class the nature of the employment at which the party injured was engaged at the time, becomes material. If it is a business connected with the railroad in the sense that it is ordinarily the duty of railroad employees, then while the party is engaged at it the statute treats him as a quasi-employee, and puts his right upon the same basis. If, however, the work has no relation to railroad work as such and is connected with the railroad only by irrelevant and immaterial circumstances of locality the case is not within the statute at all.</p> <p>In an action against a railroad company it appeared that plaintiff, a carpenter by trade, was employed in a locomotive works. A few minutes prior to the accident he was engaged with other workmen in loading an engine on cars belonging to the defendant. His work was to secure in place the parts of the engine by means of wooden blocks, so that they would not be disturbed in transit. The car stood on a track within the locomotive works. While the plaintiff was stiff employed, the cars were drawn down by an engine of the defendant along an incline to defendant’s main tracks. Plaintiff did not know that the cars were to be moved before the loading was finished. He, however, continued at his work both while they were moving and for twenty minutes after they were on the main track. He then went back to the wor
Judges: Brown, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Potter, Stewart
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.