Skip to content


Southern Ry. Co. Vs. Dantzler - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number286 U.S. 318
AppellantSouthern Ry. Co.
RespondentDantzler
Excerpt:
.....day. the respondent's intestate was the engineer of the train known as extra 483 west. he had on his person after the accident his copy of the orders received at branchville. the negligence claimed is practically the same as in no. 788, and none is alleged as against any member of the decedent's crew or that of the train with which his engine collided. after the accident dantzler was taken to a hospital, where before his death he stated to two persons that the accident was his fault-that he forgot his orders and ran past the point where he was directed to pass the other train. page 286 u.s. 318, 319 for the reasons given in the opinion in no. 788 the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. so ordered
Judgment:
SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. DANTZLER - 286 U.S. 318 (1932)
U.S. Supreme Court SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. DANTZLER, 286 U.S. 318 (1932)

286 U.S. 318

SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al.
v.
DANTZLER.
No. 787.

Submitted April 28, 1932.
Decided May 16, 1932.

Messrs. H. O'B. Cooper and S. R. Prince, both of Washington, D. C., Frank G. Tompkins, of Columbia, S. C., and Sidney S. Alderman, of Washington, D. C., for petitioners.

Mr. Wm. C. Wolfe, of Orangeburg, S. C., for respondent.

Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a companion case to No. 788, Southern Ry. Co. v. Youngblood, 286 U.S. 313 , 52 S. Ct. 518, 76 L. Ed. -, decided this day. The respondent's intestate was the engineer of the train known as Extra 483 West. He had on his person after the accident his copy of the orders received at Branchville. The negligence claimed is practically the same as in No. 788, and none is alleged as against any member of the decedent's crew or that of the train with which his engine collided. After the accident Dantzler was taken to a hospital, where before his death he stated to two persons that the accident was his fault-that he forgot his orders and ran past the point where he was directed to pass the other train.

Page 286 U.S. 318, 319

For the reasons given in the opinion in No. 788 the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

So ordered


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //