Legal Opinion

Elisha Edwards v. Pacific Fruit Express Company

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 10, 1967No. 21020PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

This is an appeal from a district court determination that Pacific Fruit Express Company (P. F. E.) is not a “common carrier by railroad.” Appellant, an injured P. F. E. employee, claims that P. F. E. is such a common carrier. At stake is appellant’s attempt to proceed under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51, et seq.

P. F. E. is a large refrigerator car company. It owns approximately 25,000 refrigerator cars and carries-about 28% of all refrigerated goods moving by rail. P. F. E. deals directly with the shipper and, among other activities, maintains a service by which it…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gaulden v. Southern Pac. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1948
  2. Aguirre v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Moleton v. Union Pacific RR Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Hetman v. Fruit Growers Express Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Edwards v. Pacific Fruit Express Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API