Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lytle v. So. Ry. &8212 Carolina Division

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided September 26, 1929No. 12739Published

1DissentJustice Cothran

(dissenting) : This is an action under the Federal Act known as the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (45. U. S. C. A., §§ 51-59) for damages on account of the wrongful death of one Alf Lytle, an employee of the defendant, while both he and the company were engaged in interstate commerce. The action is brought for the benefit of Polly Lytle, the mother of the deceased.

It is alleged in the complaint that the deceased left surviving him a widow and no children. Under the specific terms •of the Federal Act, such an action must be brought for the benefit of the surviving widow. The plaintiff seeks…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Michigan Central Railroad v. VreelandSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Reading Co. v. KoonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Wells-Dickey Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  4. Seaboard Air Line Railway v. KenneySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  5. Fidelity Fire Ins. Co. v. WindhamSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API