Kansas City Western Ry. Co. v. McAdow
240 U.S. 51 (1916)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Kansas City Western Ry. Co. v. McAdow, 240 U.S. 51 (1916)

Kansas City Western Railway Company v. McAdow

No. 127

Submitted January 18, 1916

Decided January 31, 1916

240 U.S. 51

Syllabus

If the declaration on which a case is tried brings it under the Employers' Liability Act, the fact that the particular allegation showing that plaintiff was engaged in interstate commerce appeared as an amendment does not raise a federal question.

Page 240 U. S. 52

The law governing the situation in an action in a state court under the Employers' Liability Act is equally the law of the state whether derived from Congress or the state legislature, and must be noticed by the Court.

An electric railway from Leavenworth, Kansas, to Kansas City, Kansas, with a traffic agreement with a street railway company operating in Kansas City, Missouri, held to be a railroad within the Act to Regulate Commerce. United States v. Bal. & Ohio S.W. R. Co.,226 U. S. 14. Omaha Street Ry. v. Int. Comm. Comm'n,230 U. S. 324, distinguished.

The statute of Kansas is so similar to the Federal Employers' Liability Act that the liability of the employer is not affected by the question of which governs the case, and it is under such circumstances unnecessary to determine which law applies.

The facts, which involve the validity of a verdict in an action for personal injuries and the application of the Federal Employers' Liability Act, are stated in the opinion.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.