You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Frese v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

Citations: 263 U.S. 1; 44 S. Ct. 1; 68 L. Ed. 131; 1923 U.S. LEXIS 2708Docket: 27

Court: Supreme Court of the United States; October 15, 1923; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves an action brought under the Federal Employers' Liability Act following the fatal collision of an engineer's train with another at a grade crossing. The engineer, employed by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company, died in the collision with a Wabash Railroad Company train. Under Illinois law, trains must stop and ensure the track is clear before proceeding at such crossings. The Supreme Court of Missouri found that the engineer failed to fulfill this duty, as he stopped his train over 200 feet from the crossing, while visibility was obstructed. The court emphasized the engineer's statutory duty to ensure safety, ruling that his negligence in not confirming the track was clear precluded recovery for his death. The plaintiff's argument of contributory negligence by the fireman was deemed speculative, as a witness could not confirm the fireman's actions. The court affirmed the judgment for the defendant, underscoring the engineer's personal responsibility under the statute, irrespective of any subordinate's negligence. Thus, the case reinforces the application of Illinois law in railroad operations and the engineer's duty to prevent foreseeable harm.

Legal Issues Addressed

Contributory Negligence and Recovery

Application: The court held that evidence of contributory negligence by the fireman was speculative and insufficient to allow recovery, emphasizing the engineer's primary responsibility for safety.

Reasoning: The plaintiff argued that there was evidence of contributory negligence by the fireman, which should allow recovery despite Frese's negligence.

Duty of Care under Federal Employers' Liability Act

Application: The case examines the engineer's duty to ensure the track is clear before proceeding at a grade crossing, as mandated by Illinois law, under the Federal Employers' Liability Act.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court of Missouri determined that Frese, as the operator of his train, had a legal duty to ascertain that the way was clear before entering the crossing.

Statutory Compliance in Railroad Operations

Application: The Illinois statute requiring trains to stop and ensure the track is clear before proceeding was central to the court's decision, which barred recovery due to non-compliance.

Reasoning: The judgment was affirmed, reinforcing that the Illinois statute applied and that Frese's failure to act as required barred recovery for his death.