Court Opinion

ID: 9417804
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 20:38:50.89892+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:50.719987
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Harlan
dissenting.
I concurred in the opinion and judgment of this court in Chicago & Milwaukee Railroad v. Ross, 112 U. S. 377, and do not now perceive any sound reason why the principles announced in that case should not be sustained. In my judgment the conductor of a railroad train is the representative of the company in respect of its management, all the other employés on the train are his subordinates in matters involved in such management, and for injury received by any one of those subordinates during the management of the train'by reason of the negligence of the conductor the railroad company should be held responsible. As the conductor commands the movements of the train and has general control over the employés connected with its operation, the company represented by him ought to be held responsible for his negligence resulting in injury to other employés discharging their duties under his immediate orders. If in such case the conductor be not a vice-principal, it is difficult to say who among the officers or agents of a corporation sued by one of its employés for personal injuries ought to be regarded as belonging to that class. Having these views, I am compelled to withhold my assent from the opinion and judgment in this case.