Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Rigsby
Citations
- 241 U.S. 33
- 36 S. Ct. 482
- 60 L. Ed. 874
- 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1819
Syllabus
<p>Disregard of the Safety Appliance Act is a wrongful act; and, where it results in damage to one of the class for whose especial benefit it was enacted, the right to recover the damages from the party in default is implied: — ubi jus ibi remedium.</p> <p>An employee of a railroad company has a right of action against the company for damages sustained by reason of defective appliances in violation of the Safety Appliance Act even though he was engaged at the time in intrastate, and not interstate, commerce.</p> <p>Congress may, in the exercise of the plenary power to regulate commerce between the States, require installation of safety appliances on cars used on highways of interstate commerce irrespective of the use made of any particular car at any particular time.</p> <p>When Congress enters a field of regulation within its paramount authority, state regulation of that subject-matter is excluded; and so held that, without leave of Congress, a State can no more make or enforce laws inconsistent with the Federal Safety Act giving redress for injuries to workmen or travelers occasioned by absence or insecurity of such safety devices than it can prescribe the character of the appliances.</p> <p>The right of private action by an employee injured while engaged in duties unconnected with interstate commerce, but injured by a defect in a safety appliance required by act of Congress, has such relation to the operation of such act as a regulation of interstate commerce that it is within the constitutional grant of authority to Gongress over that subject.</p> <p>Although § 4 of the Safety Appliance Act of 1910 relieves the carrier from statutory penalties while a car is being hauled to the nearest • available point for repairs, it does not relieve the carrier from liability in a remedial action for the death or injury of an employee caused by, or in connection with, the movement of a defectively equipped ear.</p> <p>Whether the defective condition of a car under the Federal
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “A disregard of the command of a statute is a wrongful act, and where it results in damage to one of the class for whose especial benefit the statute was enacted, the right to recover damages from the party in default is implied, according to a doctrine of the common law ... ”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Pitney
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.