Stone v. New York Central Railroad
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Cochrane, P. J.:
This claim should have been dismissed because the claimant was engaged in work pertaining to interstate commerce. His duty was to grease or lubricate engines as they were about to start on their trips. His duty applied to all engines whether they were about to haul interstate or intrastate trains. On the morning of the accident he began work about eight o’clock. He was injured fifteen or twenty minutes thereafter. With his hands he removed the dope or lubricating material from the container where it was kept into two pails in which he was to carry the dope to the engines a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Erie Railroad v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Erie Railroad v. SzarySupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. PolkSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Erie R. v. SzaryCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
3Cited by1 opinion
- Salvo v. New York Central RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926