Nichols v. St. Louis S. F. R. Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Per curiam
The trial court correctly concluded', from the facts found, that petitioner, at the-time of liis injury, was engaged in interstate commerce. ,
The following is from 2 Roberts Federal Liabilities of Carriers (2d Ed.) § 754: “The-actual policing of trains, to the end that passengers shall not be molested or property in; transit damaged or stolen was and still is a function of the trainmen, and a part of the act of carriage. It is none the less so when-the multiplication of a carrier’s responsibilities induces it to supplement this watchfulness of the train crew by placing on trains- and in yards…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co. v. SealeSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Birmingham Post Co. v. SturgeonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Realty Investment Co. v. City of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- West Indies v. First Nat. Bank of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1950
- United States Steel Corporation v. BakerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1957
- Arndt v. ArndtAppellate Court of Illinois · 1947
- City of Jasper v. ShererSupreme Court of Alabama · 1962
- McDuff v. KurnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.