Nurenberg, Paris, Heller & McCarthy Published Cases
- United States Supreme Court
Gallick v. The B. & O. Railroad
Co., 83 S.Ct. 659, 372 U.S. 108 (1963) Plaintiff was a foreman
for the railroad. There had been for many years a pool of stagnant water with dead
rats, pigeons and insects in the area he was working. While in that area, he was
bitten by a large bug on the left leg, which became infected and ultimately resulted
in the amputation of both legs. The Federal Employer’s Liability Act makes railroads
liable in damages to any employee suffering injury…resulting in whole or in part
from the negligence of the railroad. The railroad argued that it was not negligent
in allowing the stagnant pool to exist and that if he was injured from a bug bite,
the consequences were unforeseeable. The jury found for the plaintiff. The Court
of Appeals reversed the verdict. The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed plaintiffs’ appeal.
The United States Supreme Court accepted the case based on the interpretation of
the federal statute and held that the jury correctly found for the plaintiff based
upon the evidence and the verdict should be reinstated for plaintiff. The “bug bite”
case, as it came to be known in law school textbooks, was important because it revolutionized
the causation analysis for injuries involving railroad workers and made it easier
for them to recover well deserved benefits.
Harris v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.,
80 S.Ct. 22, 361 U.S. 15 (1959) Plaintiff, a railroad worker, was injured wile trying
to retrack a derailed car. The jury found the railroad negligent in failing to use
reasonable care to provide its employee a safe place to work in that he was required
to work on a crosstie which was elevated a substantial distance above ground level
and which was covered with grease, affording unstable footing. The jury also found
that the railroad’s negligence played a part in producing the employee’s injury.
The railroad’s appeal resulted in the Ohio Supreme Court taking the verdict away.
Plaintiff appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reinstated plaintiff’s verdict
holding that it was supported by the evidence.