Document: 332 U.S. 459 68 S.Ct. 140 92 L.Ed. 73 LILLIEv.THOMPSON. No. 206. On Petition for Certiorari Distributed Sept. 10, 1947. Decided Nov. 24, Messrs. N. Murray Edward, of St. Louis, Mo., and Grover McCormick, Memphis, Tenn., petitioner. No appearance respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner sued damages under the Federal Employers' Liability Act.1 The essence her claim was that she injured as a result respondent's negligence in sending to work place he knew be unsafe without taking reasonable measures protect her. 2 district court dismissed complaint failure state cause action entered summary judgment Circuit Court Appeals affirmed opinion. 6 Cir., 162 F.2d 716. 3 There is thus single issue case: Could it found from facts alleged complaint, supplemented by any uncontroverted allegations respondent, petitioner's injuries resulted at least part negligence?2 4 Petitioner's may summarized follows: Respondent required her, 22 year jold telegraph operator, alone between 11:30 p.m. 7:30 a.m. one-room frame building situated an isolated railroad yards Memphis. Though respondent had reason know were frequented dangerous characters, failed exercise care light its surroundings or guard patrol way. duties receive deliver messages men operating trains yard. In order trainmen get necessary them come irregular intervals throughout night, duty admit when they knocked. Because there no windows building's door on side which located, petitioner could identify persons seeking entrance only unlocking opening door. About 1:30 night injury responded knock, thinking some admission. She opened door, before close man beat with large piece iron, seriously permanently injuring 5 support his motion alleged, did not deny, assailant employee attack criminal. stated, explanation action, would causal connection premises, law does permit re overy 'for intentional criminal acts' either fellow-employee outsider.3 7 We are opinion if supported evidence, will warrant submission jury. effect aware conditions created likelihood young woman performing suffer just such fact inflicted upon That foreseeable danger misconduct irrelevant; nonetheless make provision against it.4 Breach negligence, we cannot say matter negligence. cases cited court,5 believe, do board proposition enunciated it, cover situation set forth pleadings this case. 8 granted, reversed case remanded court. 9 Reversed. 45 U.S.C. § 51, U.S.C.A. 51. 'Every common carrier * shall liable person suffering while employed resulting whole officers, agents, employees *.' Ibid. It questioned engaged interstate commerce commerce. Davis v. Green, 1922, 260 349, 43 123, 67 299; Louis-San Francisco R. Co. Mills, 1926, 271 344, 46 520, 70 979; Atlantic Coast Line Southwell, 1927, 275 64, 48 25, 72 157; & Charlotte Air 1929, 279 821, 49 350, 976, reversing per curiam 151 S.C. 1, 148 S.E. 633. See Restatement Torts, 302, comment n: 'n. actor's conduct create affords opportunity temptation third commit more serious forms misconducts several kinds. (1) intend bring about very harm other sustains. actor anticipate provide all these following immaterial civil liability person's *: '8. Where knows peculiar strong reckless (see Illustrations 21 22). 'Illustrations: '21. X Y Railroad Company strike. They their sympathizers have torn up tracks, misplaced switches otherwise attempted wreck trains. A train wrecked unguarded switch so misplaced. A, passenger, B, traveler highway adjacent track sustain harm. B because switch.' note 3, supra.

Category: 7