Swinson v. Chicago, St.P., Minneapolis & Omaha Ry. Co.,
294 U.S. 529 (1935)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Swinson v. Chicago, St.P., Minneapolis & Omaha Ry. Co., 294 U.S. 529 (1935)

Swinson v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.

No. 383

Argued February 6, 7, 1935

Decided March 11, 1935

294 U.S. 529


1. The Safety Appliance Act is liberally construed so as to give a right of recovery for every injury the proximate cause of which was a failure to comply with a requirement of the Act. P. 294 U. S. 531.

2. In an action against a railroad company under the Federal Employers' Liability Act for injuries alleged to have been caused by its failure to provide a car with a "secure grabiron or handhold" as required by the Safety Appliance Acts, the railroad defended on the ground that, at the time of the injury, the plaintiff (a brakeman) was using the grabiron as a foot brace to enable him to release a handbrake, a use for which, the railroad contended, the device was not intended. There was evidence that the grabiron in question was not sufficiently secure even for its intended use (as a handhold), and also that the use to which it was put by the plaintiff was customary. Held, it was error to direct a verdict for the defendant.

72 F.2d 649 reversed.

Certiorari, 293 U.S. 546, to review a judgment affirming a judgment upon a directed verdict for the railroad company in an action brought against it under the Federal Employers' Liability Act to recover for personal injuries.

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.