Moore v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., 291 U.S. 205 (1934)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 291 U.S. 193, click here.

Moore v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.

No. 173

Argued January 10, 11, 1934
Decided February 5, 1934
291 U.S. 205

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Syllabus

1. The jurisdiction of the District Court is to be determined by the allegations of the complaint. P. 210.

2. The Federal Employers’ Liability Act, in providing that the employee shall not be held guilty of contributory negligence, nor to have assumed the risk, in any case under it where violation by the carrier of "any statute enacted for the safety of employees" contributed to the injury or death, embraces the Federal Safety Appliance Acts. P. 210.

3. The Federal Employers’ Liability Act and Safety Appliance Acts are in pari materia, and an action under the former in connection with the latter may be brought in the federal court of a district in which the carrier is doing business. P. 211.

4. A state statute prescribing the liability of common carriers for negligence causing injuries to employees while engaged in intrastate commerce provided that no employee should be held guilty of contributory negligence, or to have assumed the risk, in any case where violation by the carrier "of any statute, state or federal, enacted for the safety of employees" contributed to the injury.

Held:

(1) That the provisions of the Federal Safety Appliance Acts for the safety of employees are in effect read into the state law. P. 212.

(2) An action under the state statute against an interstate railroad for personal injuries suffered by an employee while engaged in intrastate commerce and caused by a violation of the Federal Safety Appliance Acts is not an action arising under the laws of the United States, and, diversity of citizenship being present, may be brought in the federal court in the district of the plaintiff’s residence. Jud.Code, § 51; 28 U.S.C. § 112. P. 211.

5. The Federal Safety Appliance Acts embrace all locomotives, cars, and similar vehicles used on any railroad which is a highway of interstate commerce, and the duty to protect employees by the appliances prescribed exists even where the vehicle and employee are engaged, at the time of his injury, in intrastate commerce. P. 213.

6. Questions relating to the scope or construction of the Federal Safety Appliance Acts arising in actions in state courts for injuries sustained by employees in intrastate commerce are federal questions reviewable by this Court. P. 214.

7. Where the Circuit Court of Appeals has erroneously reversed judgment upon the ground that jurisdiction was wanting, the case will be remanded to it for consideration of the other questions presented. P. 217.

64 F.2d 472 reversed.

Certiorari, 290 U.S. 613, to review the reversal of a judgment for damages in an action for personal injuries.