Case ID: f_70/html/0028-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CALDWELL, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KANSAS & A. V. RY. CO. v. WATERS.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    
      September 16, 1895.)
    No. 559.
    Fellow Servants — Foreman and Section Crew on Railroad.
    Tlio foreman of a section crew at work upon a section of a railroad track is a fellow servant of a member of such section crew, and the latter cannot recover for an injuiy suffered in an accident which was caused in part by the contributory negligence of such foreman.
    
      Iii Error to Hie United States Court in the Indian Territory.
    This was an action by Charles Waters against the Kansas & Arkansas Valley Railway Company, for personal injuries. The plaintiff recovered judgment in the circuit court. Defendant brings error.
    Reversed.
    George E. Dodge and B. S. Johnson filed brief for plaintiff in error.
    William M. Cravens, George A. Grace, Thomas & Osborne, and Thomas Boles filed brief for defendant in error.
    Before CALDWELL, SANBORN, and THAYER, Circuit Judges.
   CALDWELL, Circuit Judge.

For a full statement of the aceident vMdi gave rise to this suit, see opinion in case of Railway Co. v. Dye (No. 558, at the present term) 70 Fed. 24. The defendant in error, Charles Waters, was one of the section crew of which Quilliam was foreman, and was on the hand ear, and was injured in the collision between the hand car and the freight train which resulted in the death of Quilliam. We have just decided, in the case of Railway Co. v. Dye, that no recovery could be had for the death of Quilliam, on Ihe ground that the accident was brought about, in whole or in part, by Ms negligence. According to the latest judgments of the supreme court of the United States, Quilliam and Wafers were fellow servants; and the latter, therefore, cannot recover for injuries which resulted from the negligence of the section foreman. Railroad Co. v. Baugh, 149 U. S. 368, 13 Sup. Ct. 914; Railroad Co. v. Hambly, 154 U. S. 349, 14 Sup. Ct. 983. The judgment of the United States court in the Indian Territory is reversed, with instructions to grant a new trial.