Manes v. St. Louis, San Francisco Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Circuit Court of Laclede County.— • Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) The plaintiff must prove that he was employed in interstate commerce or in interstate traffic at the time of his injury, and a fáilure so to do denies him any right to recover under the Federal Employers Liability Act. Vaughn v. Railroad, 177 Mo. App. 165'; Miller v. Railroad, 180 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Circuit Court of Laclede County.— • Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) The plaintiff must prove that he was employed in interstate commerce or in interstate traffic at the time of his injury, and a fáilure so to do denies him any right to recover under the Federal Employers Liability Act. Vaughn v. Railroad, 177 Mo. App. 165'; Miller v. Railroad, 180 Mo. App. 375. (2) The proof must show that the defendant wag an interstate carrier and that the employee at the time of his injury was engaged in interstate employment, that is, that the work in which he was employed at the time of his…
1Opinion of the CourtBradley, J.
Plaintiff, respondent here, recovered below on trial before tbe court and a jury, and defendant appealed. Plaintiff’s petition originally was in two counts, the first based upon comman law negligence, and the second upon the Federal Employers’ Liability Act. Upon motion by defendant, plaintiff elected to proceed on the second count.
Plaintiff had been in the employ of defendant, an interstate railway, and its predecessors for several years, most of the time as section hand. About six weeks prior to the injury complained of, plaintiff went to work in what is called the mason gang, making and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. HarringtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Zikos v. Oregon R. & Navigation Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Washington · 1910
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sailor v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Glidewell v. Q.O. K.C.R.R. Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1921
- Hamarstrom v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1938
- Angelos v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Crysel v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.