Case Name: RICHMOND, FREDERICKSBURG & POTOMAC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. Leontine RULE, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1957-10-17
Citations: 248 F.2d 756
Docket Number: No. 13815
Parties: RICHMOND, FREDERICKSBURG & POTOMAC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. Leontine RULE, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 248
Pages: 756–757

Head Matter:
RICHMOND, FREDERICKSBURG & POTOMAC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. Leontine RULE, Appellee.
No. 13815.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Oct. 9, 1957.
Decided Oct. 17, 1957.
Mr. William B. Jones, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. George E. Hamilton, III, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. Arthur L. Willcher, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Bernard Shank-man, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and DANAHER and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals from a judgment for the plaintiff in a suit for personal injuries suffered while the plaintiff was a passenger on the defendant's train in Virginia. The court charged the jury that "As a common carrier the defendant railroad company was required by law to use the highest degree of care for the safe carrying of plaintiff as a passenger. This highest degree of care which the law places upon a common carrier does not make the common carrier an insurer of the passengers' safety but it does require that the common carrier shall exercise extraordinary vigilance for the purpose of protecting its passengers against injury We disagree with the defendant's contention that this imposed a higher standard of care than the Virginia rule, which is that "a common carrier must exercise the highest degree of practical care for the safety of its passengers " Crist v. Washington, Virginia & Maryland Coach Co., 196 Va. 642, 645, 85 S.E.2d 213, 215. We have considered the defendant's other contentions and find jno error affecting substantial rights.
Affirmed.