Legal Document

419 U.S. 318 95 Supreme Court Reporter 472. 42 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 498 Eugene C. KELLEY, Petitioner,v.SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY. Number 73—1270. Argued Oct. 22, 1974. Decided Dec. 23, Syllabus Petitioner, an employee of a trucking company (PMT), was injured while transferring automobiles in respondent's railyard from railroad car to PMT auto trailer, operation that performed under contract for respondent. Although employees occasionally consulted with about the operation, supervisors controlled day-to-day unloading process. claiming he sufficiently control bring him coverage Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), which makes covered liable negligently causing injury or death any person 'while is employed' by railroad, and accident resulted negligence, brought suit against respondent FELA. The District found relationship between petitioner sufficed make FELA apply, court having concluded that: serving generally as agent; were agents purposes operation; work fulfilled nondelegable duty Appeals reversed, Court's test liability too broad. Held: 1. language requires not only plaintiff be agent rail carrier but carrier's servant, here erred holding (who according court's findings neither borrowed servant nor dual PMT) came within FELA, since those also did establish master-servant would necessary render subservant railroad. Nor conclusion 'responsible' tantamount finding had right physical conduct like operation. Pp. 322—326. 2. worked most time on premises responsible checking safety conditions cars showed two companies' operations closely related, supervised consequently FELA's requirement remains unsatisfied even proper test. 326—331. 3. record should re-examined light legal standard. 331—332. 9 Cir., 486 Reporter, 2nd 1084, vacated remanded. R. Jay Engel, San Francisco, Cal., petitioner. John Judge Corrigan, Los Angeles, Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioner Kelley seriously when fell top tri-level where been working. He sought recovery his injuries 35 Statutes-at-Large 65, amended, 45 Code KF62 §§ 51—60. Under acknowledged technically employ rather than contended agreed, Ninth Circuit 1084 (1973), creating apparent conflict previous decision Fourth Circuit, Smith versus Norfolk & Western Co., 407 501, cert. denied, 395 979, 89 2134, 23 767 (1969).1 We granted certiorari resolve conflict. 416 935, 94 1931, 40 285 (1974). vacate judgment remand case further proceedings 2 * At accident, Pacific Motor Trucking wholly owned subsidiary Southern eight years.2 engaged various enterprises, primarily conjunction its parent company. Among PMT's functions transporting new Francisco automobile dealers area. As part contractual arrangement unload Pacific's 'trilevel' auto-carrying flatcars they arrived yard. It petitioner's job unhook their places drive them into yard transfer trailers. maintained permanent basis. there area who consult process, directed operations. 3 On July 3, 1963, unhooking usual fashion level one flatcars. A cable, normally affixed flatcar protect falls, apparently place because equipment defect. During suffered disabling injury. subsequently received workmen's compensation payments PMT. Shortly before three-year statute limitations run, respondent,3 it negligent failing maintain cable working order. 4 In complaint, alleged employed meaning After six-day hearing, Court, sitting trier fact,4 ruled favor employment question. railroad's responsibility, found, 'pursuant responsibilities shippers tariff responsibilities.' addition, supplied ramps worked. responsibility supervision respondent's, concluded, though 'the exercise thereof executed Company.' sum, being 'in fulfillment non-delegable defendant Company,' sufficient this resolution issue, stipulated parties agreed set damages at $200,000, trial entered amount. 5 observed 'employed' either permanently accident. noted clause just agency plaintiff. Concluding applied unduly broad liability, reversed judgment. II 6 insists effect made factual upsetting finding. Of course, if such after applying principles law, end matter. Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 52(a), appellate must aside concludes are 'clearly erroneous.' See Gypsum 333 364, 394—395, 68 525, 541—542, 92 L.Ed. 746 (1948). need reach question whether clearly erroneous, however, we agree erroneous standard Singer Mfg. 374 174, 194 n. 9, 83 1773, 1783, 10 823 (1963). 7 heart analysis 'traditional relationship' PMT, petitioner, circumstances Act. But has repeatedly required more satisfy From beginning proof Robinson Baltimore Ohio 237 84, 94, 491, 494, 59 849 (1915); Hull Philadelphia Reading 252 475, 479, 358, 359, 64 670 (1920); Baker Texas 359 227, 228, 79 664, 665, 756 (1959). 8 early case, words 'employee' used natural sense, 'intended describe conventional relation employer employe .' Robinson, supra, U.S., S.Ct., 494. Baker, reaffirmed employment, status, determined reference common-law principles. referred sections Restatement (Second) Agency dealing borrowed-servant doctrine general guideline jury instructions.5 Section 220(1) defines 'a perform services affairs another respect performance subject other's control.' § 220(2), recites factors helpful definition. While section determining particular bilateral properly characterized independent contractor relationship, can instructive analyzing three-party employers worker. principles, basically three methods 'employment' nominally another. First, could 227; Limstead Chesapeake 276 28, 48 241, 72 453 (1928). Second, deemed acting masters simultaneously. 226; Williams Pennsylvania 313 203, 209 (CA2 1963). Finally, turn 5(2); Schroeder 397 452 (CA7 1968). Nothing suggests PMT.6 come closest suggesting running through theory fails court, 11 exercised over operations, although bore 'responsibility' functions. these facts, plainly correct concluding relationship. significantly weaker course whenever service premises. 'control control' test, contrast, met shown role second commonlaw servant.7 Accordingly, III 12 dissenters argue defining applicable standard, reverse reinstate facts contend, satisfied requirements clause, disagree. 13 Part II, concerning fall far short compelling Pacific. other determinations add no force claim. Kelley's crew reflect fact activities companies related necessarily coordinated. Railroad tending naturally substantial contact supervisory personnel conducted advise supervisors. find played significant or, particularly, injury.8 workers.9 14 distinct organization overlap ranks. Indeed, labor Teamsters expressly provided cases, fail 15 Pullman Company, porter charge hauled employees, integral held enough Even taking tickets fares passengers boarding night This merely accommodation demonstration employee. stated passed, '(i)t well known interstate trains persons masters. Congress, familiar situation, use appropriate expression taken indicate purpose include among whom act.' company, selected own 'defined duties, fixed paid wages, tasks, placed removed pleasure.' Id., 93, 493. 16 following year, again faced worker caused death, contractor. Chicago, R.I. P.R. Bond, 240 449, 36 403, 60 735 (1916). decedent procure coal wood loading center Enid, Okl. decedent's some extent, directions simply reformulations flexible obligations assumed contract, detailed actions (decedent) employees.' 455—456, 406. provide 'not engagement submitting subordination momentarily superintendence, capable action, judged results.' 456, 17 Bond relied earlier Standard Oil Anderson, 212 215, 29 252, 53 480 (1909), clarify distinction longshoreman operator lowered load oil cases him. winchman, argued winchman stevedoring longshoreman's employer. stevedore furnished stevedore, wrote; employee's work. Focusing locus power direct servant's work, emphasized importance distinguishing 'authoritative direction control, mere suggestion details cooperation, larger undertaking.' 222, 254. Cf. Denton Yazoo Mississippi Valley 284 305, 52 141, 76 310 (1932). 18 evidence contacts may indicate, passing information obviously large coordinated Del Vecchio 233 2, (CA3 1956). informal groups assume character pro hac vice railroad.10 19 setting provides contrast. maintenance trial, introduced show task material pumping roadbed Most significantly, 20 supervisor, admittedly daily directive individual workmen, including precise point mixture pumped, move next point, consistency mixture.' 228—229, 665. 21 Because serious dispute, permitted go jury. have indicated, support coworkers were, effect, IV 22 propriety remand. rendered decided erroneous. Yet, failure adopt proposed relating significance what see 6, constitute reviewable Similarly, meant suggest view developed opinion, think best require re-examine instructions accordance opinion. Vacated 24 STEWART, concurring 25 status law. error, thus so take fresh look record, collect 26 novel one. law master us long time, adequate exposition elsewhere, e.g., 5(2), 220, 226, 227 renders much extended discussion unnecessary. my chief problem insistence upon dissecting particularized case. Whether original factfinder determine. 27 today substantially invades function. If wishes decide issue itself, leave Judge, saw heard witnesses, gratuitous. 28 N Immigration Nationality Decisions believe both efficient allocation judicial resources ends justice served remand—but genuine remand, affording latitude function factfinder. bristles hints seems me approach disingenuousness. DOUGLAS, BRENNAN concurs, dissenting. 30 Today's marks return era interpreted hostile restrictive manner federal judiciary. am constrained register dissent. 31 first enacted 1906, 34 232, responded unconstitutional. Cases, 207 463, 297 (1908). Congress tried 1908 produced now effect. 51 et seq. upheld statute, Second 223 1, 32 169, 56 327 (1912), hostility end. defense assumption risk was, part, still available Seaboard Air Line Horton, 492, 635, 58 1062 (1914). contributory negligence defense, circumvented considerable degree developing 'primary duty.' Great Northern Wiles, 444, 406, 732 1939, legislation needed. 1404. result liberal emloyer many defenses. Tiller Atlantic Coast 54, 63 87 610 (1943). Since 1939 spirit amendments. Gradual liberalization occurred, narrow, technical years eschewed. W. Prosser, Law Torts 536—537 (4th ed. 1971). development occur without Divisions occurred merits involve itself all. See, Rogers Missouri 352 500, 77 443, 493 (1957). Nevertheless, continued oversee application insist interpretations consistent Act's overall purpose. 33 One questions arisen definition employment. 51, resulting negligence. damage done killed carrier. past judges sometimes give rigid, content, rejected (1959), hired workman Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Nichols firm along main-line performing designed strengthen stabilize roadbed. struck train. judge refused submit matter death. ground Noting terms 'special sense,' reasoned 'contains elements relevant Restatement, 2d, comment c; a.' 228. Ward 362 396, 80 789, 820 (1960), involved similar considerations Baker. laborer day off fixing siding tract belonged third party. party injury, existed improperly charged consider factor, awareness victim number considered 220. Many Courts confronted problems Ward, nontechnical based aspects presented. For example, K—T Hearson, 422 1037 (CA10 1970), cleaner. stopped doing cleaning do job, firm. But, examining all factors, affirmed ruling reasonable men differ purposes. 1968), deceased certain pickup delivery pailroad. Considering submitted nature exist. Byrne 262 906 1958); Cimorelli New York Central 148 575 (CA6 1945). see, Fawcett D.C., 242 F.Supp. 675 (WDLa.1963), aff'd, 347 (CA5 1965). 37 501 (CA4 1969). There unloaded autos cars, and, here, tier cars. summary judgment, doubt affirmed, using language: 'Though contractors accorded . adjunct will treated Thus traditional concepts extend Act.' 502. supra. holds misstates 38 All servants1 2(2). servants 220 Restatement. contractor, never servant. same N, a. source basis agent.2 39 present word 'agent' 'servant' committed error. our inquiry limited narrow examination form requisite permit ask correctly described. numerous erroneous' 52(a). years. 220(2)(f), chapter respondent, business pursuant responsibilities. 220(2)(h). unskilled variety. 220(2)(d), hour. 220(2)(g). unclear hammers wrenches, area, safety. 220(2)(e). Respondent immediate carried out others who, 220(2) (a).3 41 reasons Appeals' reversal favor. does mean F.2d, 910, Westinghouse locomotive '(t)here is, (the victim) Westinghouse. adduced enable conclude Railroad.' 226 227. payroll someone purposes, then Such simple devised, change up decide. reason reversing relying 'agency' therefore labels confused. concept restricted way, yet expanding accommodate decisions relationships scope unimportant, gave substantive content Baker—Restatement easily existence existed. technical, abstract concern. sort concern motivate context. 43 majority different tack Appeals. Citing amendments Act, argues insufficient factors. quite majority's concentration distinctions regarding kinds degrees cooperation.4 justified already strong objection remanded dissent rigid old-fashioned indicates applicable. 44 strictly doctrinal sense great impact fear precedent bodes ill future. distorts accepted reflects kind prior below. 46 BLACKMUN, 47 traveled order accord variety situations. Shenker 5, 1667, 1670, 709 (1963), North Carolina Zachary, 232 248, 260, 309, 591 Its well-chalked slate erased good reasons. Neither mature highly explaining saying be. me, per curiam controls corporation right-of-way. consisted sand cement it. train job. petitioners Evidence introduced, declined jury, entitle protection. state courts disturb 49 special whose given themselves matters Each said, peculiar 'ordinarily feature determinative." 'perfectly plain' law.' pointed prove 'was railroad'; road 'furnished pumped roadbed'; Ibid. controvert this. determination 50 So here. loading-and-unloading ramp Francisco. unchaining car. hired, by, discharged subsidiary. officers directors ramp. site hourly obligation shipper. unskilled. check repairs. frequently felt heed supervisor's command.* this, create fact, illustrates teaches. way feel footnote ante, 325, gives undue emphasis treatment Every actively practicing attorney knows readily presented counsel; almost always reject prefer draft clerks prepare them; middle course. workman. adjustment-of-proposed-findings route reached. disclaims modification standards allowing otherwise. implies 'day-to-day' 'supervision' Ante, 331. Does orders issued frequency (e.g., every day, days) 'daily' normal 'course work,' 665—666)? say. suspect inclined doubts plaintiffs vulnerable challenge. 54 opens railroads country avoid liability. That portions 55 Appeals, Very situations cases. E.g., Tarboro 396 941 393 1027, 637, 569 (1969); Mazzucola 281 267 1960); 1945); Thornton 307 667 (E.D.Va.1969); Hunter Missouri-Kansas-Texas 258 (N.D.Okl.1966); (W.D.La.1963), aff'd curiam, (CA5), 382 907, 86 242, 159 (1965); Valentine South Corp., 218 (E.D.La.1963), 334 244 1964); Chicago Eastern Illinois Ill.App.3d 596, 300 766 (1973); Waters Ill.App.2d 48, 229 151 (1967); Turpin baron Q.R. 403 (Mo.), 384 1003, 1925, 1015 (1966); Drago 93 N.J.L. 176, 106 803, 251 553, 118, 411 (1919). abandoned claim employees. nonemployment deprive procedural advantages action nonemployer alternative. suit, California's run. initially damanded try court. year later, 400, 792, cited instructing bear approved instruction incorporated several mentioned appears consciously Kelley. 'had (petitioner),' 'believed existed' them, findings, adopted less critical whole part. Moreover, specifically requested. appeared weight 'non-delegable duty' undertook added cost shipper affect free subcontract publication tariffs automatically anyone tasks Norman Spokane-Portland S.R. 101 350 (D.C.Or.1950), 192 1020 (CA9 1951). testimony clerks, arriving departing 'car-whackers,' inspection switchmen, finished switch engine clear tracks. These contacts, buttress addition discussed above, period, labor, compensated wage. inquiry, (f), (g), how aid They plain explain activities. somewhat analogous janitor B O Railroad. O, nearby station Pittsburgh Lake Erie (P LE). P LE's injured, 'there O.' 1670. wrote: '(U)nder common loaned-servant services. undisputed times sole intimations might LE baggageman example minimum cooperation carry undertaking, cannot amount supervision.' 1671 (footnote omitted). Accord, 479 480, 359—360, (1920). Linstead Cheaspeake (1928), Contract specific Linstead, conductor Big Four instructed accompany tracks Kentucky Ohio, trainmaster. employee' recover term expresses g. Support that, below, once proposal suppliers accessorial included S.Rep.No. 661, 76th Cong., 1st Sess., (1939). value multiple permits analyst reliance inquiries control. Some factors—such supervision, performed, supplies tools work—are obvious relevance. Other perhaps weight, helpful. skill ease shifted And length nominal aiding likewise indicative shift states 'among others.' Another factor piercing corporate veil disregarding separate entities. urge so. Brief pierced presumably inappropriate record. account relies modern nothing subjects investigation considering exists practice took supervisors, follow jeopardize jobs. App. 57.

Classification Label: 7