Hull v. Philadelphia & Reading Ry. Co., 252 U.S. 475 (1920)

Hull v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Company


No. 151


Argued January 16, 1920
Decided April 19, 1920
252 U.S. 475

CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Syllabus

The terms "employee" and "employed" in the Employers’ Liability Act are used in their natural sense, importing the conventional relation of employer and employee. P. 479.

Under an agreement for through freight service between two railroads, each retained control of its own train crews while on the other’s line, subject to regulations, orders, and discipline imposed by the other for the purpose of coordinating their movements to its own operations and for insuring safety and furthering the general object of the agreement, and the acts of each company’s employees while on the line of the other were performed as part of their duty to their general employer. Held that an employee of one company did not become an employee of the other within the meaning of the Employers’ Liability Act, while so operating on the other’s line. Id.North Carolina R. Co. v. Zachary, 232 U.S. 248, distinguished.

132 Md. 540 affirmed.

The case is stated in the opinion.