Southern Ry. Co. v. Gray,
241 U.S. 333 (1916)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Southern Ry. Co. v. Gray, 241 U.S. 333 (1916)

Southern Railway Company v. Gray

No. 355

Argued May 5, 1916

Decided May 22, 1916

241 U.S. 333


Contradictory statements made by a witness prior to his examination in the case can have no legal tendency to establish the truth of their subject matter.

Rights and obligations under the Federal Employers' Liability Act depend upon that Act and applicable principles of common law as interpreted and applied in federal courts.

In an action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, negligence by the employer is essential to a recovery, and where there is no evidence to show why a brakeman, sent to guard his train, should lie down and go to sleep on the track within a short distance of a curve, negligence cannot be imputed to the engineer of an approaching passenger train for not stopping his train before striking him, it appearing that the distance from the curve was less than that in which a train could be stopped even if a light could have been seen. The engineer of an approaching train, on seeing the lights of a brakeman sent out to guard the latter's train, has a right to presume

Page 241 U. S. 334

that the brakeman is standing on guard, and he does not owe such brakeman a duty to immediately top his train or a to avoid hitting him.

167 N.C. 433 reversed.

The facts, which involve the validity of a verdict and judgment in an action under the Employers' Liability Act, are stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.