Document: 332 U.S. 625 68 S.Ct. 296 92 L.Ed. 242 CALLENv.PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. No. 331. Argued Dec. 18, 1947. Decided Jan. 12, 1948. Mr. B. Nathaniel Richter, of Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner pro hac vice by special leave Court. Philip Price, respondent. Justice JACKSON delivered the opinion 1 Plaintiff, a railroad brakeman, brought this action under Federal Employers' Liability Act, 35 Stat. 65, 53 1404, 45 U.S.C. § 51, U.S.C.A. 51. He recovered jury verdict $24,990, but Circuit Court Appeals reversed because errors in charge District Judge and ordered new trial, 3 Cir., 162 F.2d 832. The plaintiff's claim as submitted to was negligence on part an engineer effecting coupling operation at speed which plaintiff thought would jolt him off stirrup car he riding. In jumping safety, claimed have received severe permanent back injury. defendant denied occurrence, offered testimony that did not work time question also evidence his admission day instead shoveled snow get out garage. It testified had told conductor hurt different occasion. But if injury sustained place alleged, negligence, contributory pleaded general release. controversy here concerns 2 proved consideration $250 executed release 'all claims demands I or can may against said Pennsylvania Railroad Co. reason personal injuries me' involved suit. released loss expens, recited payment compromise liability, read understood agreement sum money stated therein is all receive. On release, knew what doing intended waive any further claim, when began talking settlement should between $300 $350. No fraud reliance agent's assurance 'there nothing wrong' 'could job.' 4 At from might well find serious agent admitted know suffering doctors trial described. gone family physician who taped chiropractor whose report took with agent. diagnose suggest weakness making more susceptible recurrence. procured no medical examination plaintiff. determined amount basis belief there liability. 5 Instructing jury, court stated: 6 'Anyhow, they settled extent $250.00 has been admitted, both sides agree contemplation sort 7 'Now, am going consider binding $250.00, you will deduct otherwise give him. got expenses bills services obtained up time; entitled your hands ask award him, agreed take toward particular phase course does ask, understand it, be excused that,—he admits it is. 8 'The attorneys sides, do insofar applies injuries, certainly didn't permanently injured * *.' 9 Appeals, quite rightly we think, construed withdrawing validity (162 832, 834): 'This palpable error facts relating entirely aside Court's incorrect assumption dispute about permanency injuries.' 10 An record makes clear issue raised sharply litigated whether injury, manner character. Only resolved favor one party other could known finding mutual mistake fact executing court, however, permance defendant, least so far concerned, withdrew jury. Even permanence were still existed since insists act nature entered into small because, upon its time, liability indicated. We think argue these contentions them proper instructions. 11 apparent accepted instructions subject Returning, rendered 'for plaintiff, assess damages $25,240.00, reimbursed $250.00.' saying wanted make right, asked made net foreman did. Under received, little else do, withdrawn consequently given law govern determination such question. 12 While assumed setting after challenge every effort correct impression, affected damages. way alter rested right holding failure submit latter reversible error. 13 are urged, decide case properly disregarded ground burden attacks show grounds fraud, rest pleads contract, prove absence those grounds. contended ever law; rather, law, cases. amicus brief puts 'We establishing taken employe Act placed railroad. And where nominal paid less than even equal only wages lost, itself held facts, presumed possesses superior facilities determining Considerable concurring Second Ricketts v. Co., 153 757, 760, 164 A.L.R. 387. However persuasive arguments inequality bargaining power justify change frank recognition Congress change. amendment character rather courts introduce. If adopt policy depriving settlements litigation their prima facie validity, compensation certain amounts thereof speculative. until changes statutory plan, releases employees stand same others. One must bear showing contract tainted invalidity, either practiced parties acted. 14 violates provides enable common carrier 'exempt created chapter, shall void.' 66, 55, 55. obvious device exempt means compromising recognizing possibility. Where controversies exist how much, settle without litigation. 15 Since believe directing permitted pass issues fact, judgment affirmed. 16 Affirmed. 17 BLACK, DOUGLAS, MURPHY RUTLEDGE, being view governed rule seamen admiralty (see separate Jerome Frank, 767—770, 387), dissent affirmance judgment.

Category: 7