Skip to main content
· 7/1/1914

Hench v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Citations

  • 246 Pa. 1
  • 91 A. 1056
  • 1914 Pa. LEXIS 466

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Railroads—Death of employee — Acts of Congress of April 22,1908, 85 Stat. 65, c. 149, and March 2,1898, 27 Stat. 581, ■ c. 196.</p> <p>1. In an action against a .railroad company brought under the Acts of Congress of April 22, 1908, 35 Stat. 65, c. 149, and March 2, 1893, 27 Stat. 531, c. 196, to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s husband, the burden is upon the plaintiff to prove the facts necessary to show the violation of the Federal statutes, and that the injured party was engaged in interstate commerce, or with its instrumentalities at the time of the accident.</p> <p>2. In such case where it appeared that decedent was employed as a brakeman in the freight yard of the defendant company and that he was injured while coupling empty cars, but the only evidence from which it could be inferred that the cars which deceased was coupling were being used in interstate commerce was that in the yard in which he was employed, cars containing both intra and interstate commerce were received, stored, shifted, and reloaded from time to time, there is no presumption that the cars being shifted at the time of the accident were intended for use in interstate commerce.</p> <p>Nvidence — Suppression of evidence — Rule of spoliation — Negligence — Railroads.</p> <p>3. Where in an action against a railroad company under the Acts of .Congress of April 22, 19'08> 35 Stat. 65, c. 149, and March 2, 1893, 27 Stat. 531, e. 196, to recover damages for death of plaintiff’s husband, a brakeman who was fatally injured while coupling cars, defendant’s clerk who.kept certain records of cars moved in the yard was subposnaed by plaintiff to produce the records of the conductor of the train which injured deceased, for the purpose of showing what cars such conductor moved in the freight yard on the night of the accident and the witness testified that he had no such records, and that upon inquiry he was informed that no records of empty cars were kept, the contention of the

Judges: Brown, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Mosohzisker, Potter, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.