American Railroad Co. Of Porto Rico v. Didricksen, 227 U.S. 145 (1913)

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 227 U.S. 131, click here.

American Railroad Company of Porto Rico v. Didricksen

No. 72

Submitted December 6, 1912
Decided January 27, 1913
227 U.S. 145

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT

OF THE UNITED STATES FOR PORTO RICO

Syllabus

Where the plaintiffs in an action under the Employers’ Liability Act are the sole beneficiaries under the statute, a general verdict in their favor, without instructions on this point, overcomes the objection of lack of capacity to sue.

The Employers’ Liability Act extends to Porto Rico, as held in American Railroad Co. v. Birch, 224 U.S. 547, and now held that the Safety Appliance Act also extends to Porto Rico.

While Porto Rico has not for all purposes been fully incorporated into the United States, it is not foreign territory, nor are its citizens aliens. Williams v. Gonzales, 192 U.S. 1. Its organization is in most essentials that of a territory. Kopel v. Bingham, 211 U.S. 468.

In view of the provisions of § 3 thereof, effect cannot be given to the Employers’ Liability Act of 1908 in Porto Rico unless the Safety Appliance Act referred to in § 3 are in force there also.

Under the Employers’ Liability Act of 1908, pecuniary damages only are recoverable, and these do not include loss of society or companionship of a son to a parent. Michigan Central Railroad v. Vreeland, ante, p. 59.

5 P.R. 401, 427 reversed.

The facts, which involve the construction of the Employers’ Liability Act of 1908 before its amendment by the Act of 1910, and the application of the act to Porto Rico, are stated in the opinion.