Seaboard Air Line Railway v. Koennecke

Citations

• 239 U.S. 352
• 36 S. Ct. 126
• 60 L. Ed. 324
• 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1453

Syllabus

<p>The allowance by the trial court after the testimony was in, and over defendant’s objection, of an amendment to bring the case specifically under the Employers’ Liability Act, held not to have exceeded the discretionary power of the court, or to have been so arbitrary as to amount to denial of due process of law.</p> <p>In actions under the Employers’ Liability Act, when questions of negligence and the like are brought here only because arising in actions under the statute and involving no new principles, this court confines itself to a summary statement of results.</p> <p>In this, case, as deceased was engaged in distributing cars from an interstate train and clearing the track for another interstate train, he was engaged in interstate commerce.</p> <p>The possibility that a local train might before arrival at final destination where the accident occurred have dropped all interstate cars and taken up only local cars is too remote to warrant withdrawal of a ease under, the Employers’ Liability Act from the jury.</p> <p>On the record in this case, it would not have been proper for the trial court to have withdrawn the case from jury on questions of defendant’s negligence or plaintiff’s assumption of risk.</p>