Hinson v. . R. R., 172 N.C. 646

Summary

The court affirmed a nonsuit in favor of the defendant railroad after an employee lost his leg while attempting to pass beneath coupled railroad cars in a switching yard. The court held that the Federal Employers' Liability Act governed because the plaintiff was engaged in work connected with interstate commerce, and that the evidence did not show a breach of duty by the railroad. It further concluded that the plaintiff knowingly assumed the risk by choosing to go under the cars despite having safe alternative routes.

Holdings

1. The Federal Employers' Liability Act governed because plaintiff's work preparing an engine for an interstate run and the railroad's interstate operations placed plaintiff and his employer within interstate commerce.
2. The plaintiff's evidence failed to show that defendant breached any duty owed to him. The railroad was not required to ring bells, blow whistles, or send a person ahead every time cars were shifted in its switching yards, particularly where plaintiff was under the train and could not have been seen from the engine, tender, or cars.
3. Plaintiff assumed the risk of his injury by deliberately going beneath the connected cars when he knew the danger of switching operations and had safe, readily available routes around the train.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiff's evidence established negligence or breach of duty by the railroad under the Federal Employers' Liability Act.
2. Whether the plaintiff, who deliberately went beneath connected railroad cars despite available safe routes, assumed the risk of his conduct.
3. Whether the plaintiff was engaged in interstate commerce so that the Federal Employers' Liability Act governed the claim.

Disposition

affirmed