Myers v. Reading Company (331 U.S. 477)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 2, 1947 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 331 U.S. 477 · 67 S. Ct. 1334
- Docket
- No. 367
- Argued
- February 6, 1947
- Decided
- June 2, 1947
- Term
- October Term 1946
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Burton
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Vinson, Justice Burton (wrote), Justice R. H. Jackson, Justice Douglas, Justice Frankfurter, Justice Reed, Justice Black, Justice Rutledge, Justice Murphy
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Burton delivered the opinion of the Court. This action for damages alleged to have been caused to the petitioner by the respondent’s use, in violation of the Safety Appliance Acts, of a railroad freight car not equipped with efficient hand brakes, presents the question whether the evidence at the trial, with the inferences that the jury justifiably could draw from it, was sufficient to support the verdict for the petitioner. We hold that it was. Thé action was brought in the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by the petitioner, John Myers, against his employer, the Reading Company. He claimed that he received personal injuries caused by the respondent’s use in interstate commerce, in its railroad yards at Port Richmond, Philadelphia, of a freight car equipped with a defective hand brake in violation of the Safety Appliance Acts requiring such cars to be equipped with “efficient hand brakes.” At the close of the evidence, respondent moved for a directed verdict. The motion was not granted, and the jury returned a verdict for $5,000 in favor of the petitioner. The respondent then moved to have the verdict set aside and to have judgment entered in its favor. On December 28, 1945, this motion was granted and judgment was so entered. 63 F. Supp. 817. On May 29, 1946, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed…
Excerpt of a 15,474-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.