concurring decisions of courts below. Chicago, Mil. & St. P.
Ry. v. United States..
6. Damages arising from restraints of permanent injunction,
afterwards reversed, are not recoverable on temporary in-
junction bonds, particularly where decree of permanent
injunction expressly released further liability on the bonds.
St. Louis, I. Mt. & So. Ry. v. McKnight.
7. Rule 15, District Court for Eastern District of Arkansas,
relates merely to damages recoverable on bonds accompany-
ing restraining orders or temporary injunctions. Id.
8. Where claims are all liquidated and amounts are not dis-
puted, but only liability under bond, the surety, which has
not elected to pay into court, is chargeable with interest
from commencement of suit upon the aggregate of the claims
allowed as reduced to the penal amount of the bond. Illinois
Surety Co. v. John Davis Co... . .
DAWES COMMISSION. See Indians, 1-6.
DEED. See Indians, 5–7; Public Lands, 14.
DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER. See Constitu-
tional Law, VI, 4.
DEMURRER. See Jurisdiction, I, (3).
DESCENT AND DISTRIBUTION. See Indians, 5; Public
Lands, 15-16.
State may require street car company to carry city detec-
tives free when in discharge of duty. Sutton v. New Jersey 258
Of liability of surety. See Sureties.
Amendment of General Order in Bankruptcy No. XXXII,
concerning opposition to discharge or composition....... 641
Between interstate and intrastate rates. See Interstate
Commerce Acts, I.
In valuation of railroad's property for purposes of state
taxation. See Taxation.
DISTRICT COURTS. See references under Construction.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS. See Jurisdiction,
III, (6); VI.
DOCUMENTS. See references under Construction.
As to whether foreign corporation is doing business within a
State, and validity of service of process. See Jurisdiction,
I, (2).
DRAINAGE. See Taxation, 1.
Rights of way over National Forests. See Public Land,
9-11.
1. State compensation law putting interstate carriers and
employees to election between its provisions and Federal
Employers' Liability Act, invalid. Erie R. R. v. Winfield.. 170
2. Appellee having elected in Circuit Court of Appeals to
remit part of verdict and judgment held to be excessive, his
cross writ of error complaining of reduction must be dis-
missed. Woodworth v. Chesbrough..
1. Existence of petitioning corporation, right to condemn,
inability to agree on compensation, and necessity for ap-
propriation, matters of local law. Cuyahoga Power Co. v.
Northern Realty Co.....
2. In granting irrigation district privilege of obtaining
lands for canals by condemnation, State may impose duty
to build bridges, without compensation, for access between
adjacent lands intersected by canals, including those ac-
quired by purchase. Farmers Irrig. Dist. v. O'Shea.
3. Nebraska Rev. Stats. 1913, § 3438, imposes this duty. Id.
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT:
(1) State Regulations in Conflict With.
1. Obligations of interstate railroad carriers to employees in-
jured in interstate commerce are regulated both inclusively
and exclusively by Federal Employers' Liability Act; no
room for state regulation, even in respect of injuries occur-
ring without fault, as to which federal act provides no
remedy. New York Cent. R. R. v. Winfield...
Erie R. R. v. Winfield ....
New York Cent. R. R. v. Tonsellito...
2. Award under New York Workmen's Compensation Act
for injuries, not attributable to negligence, sustained by a
railroad employee engaged in interstate commerce, held
void. New York Cent. R. R. v. Winfield.
3. State cannot interfere with federal act either by putting
carriers and employees to election between its provisions
and those of a state compensation law or by imputing such
election through statutory presumption. Erie R. R. v.
Winfield..
(2) Interstate Commerce Vel Non. Maritime Cases.
4. In. leaving the yard after his day's work in switching in-
terstate and intrastate commerce, employee is engaged in
interstate commerce. Erie R. R. v. Winfield...
5. Employee not engaged in interstate commerce when
placing cars of carrier, containing its supply coal, upon un-
loading trestle within its yards and when interstate move-
ment occurred as long as 17 days previously and the cars,
with the coal, in the meantime, have remained upon sidings
and switches in yards. Lehigh Valley R. R. v. Barlow..... 183
6. Act applies only where injury occurs in railroad opera-
tions or their adjuncts; cannot be extended to interstate
maritime transportation merely because vessel is owned and
operated by interstate carrier by railroad. Southern Pacific
Jensen
7. "Boats" in the act refers to vessels which are but part
of railroad's extension or equipment as understood and ap-
plied in common practice. Id.
8. Question whether employee was engaged in interstate
commerce not discussed by this court where there was ade-
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT-Continued.
quate evidence upon it for submission to the jury, no evi-
dent, material error in charge, where both courts below sus-
tained judgment, and no special circumstances exist. New
York Cent. R. R. v. Tonsellito..
9. Employee injured while helping to raise wrecked car to
rescue fellow employee and, coincidently, to clear a track for
interstate commerce, is engaged in interstate commerce.
Southern Ry. v. Puckett. . .
10. Employee engaged in interstate commerce when called
aside by event which led to injury not within act. Id.
11. Defendant, incorporated as an ordinary railway com-
pany (as distinguished from a street railway company), op-
erating a suburban electric railway largely on private right
of way between District of Columbia and Maryland, as
common carrier of passengers, held within act. Washington
Ry. & Elec. Co. v. Scala.
(3) Negligence; Assumption of Risk; Fellow Servants.
State regulation where injury occurs without fault. See (1),
supra.
Instructions on assumption of risk and contributory negli-
gence. See Erie R. R. v. Purucker...
12. Where brakeman was thrown from moving train as
result of couplers opening, held that, in view of the Safety
Appliance Act, negligence might be inferred from mere
opening of couplers. Minn. & St. Louis R. R. v. Gotschall.. 66
13. Employee does not assume risk attributable to negli-
gence of co-employees until aware of it, unless so obvious that
ordinarily prudent person would appreciate it. Erie R. R.
v. Purucker.
14. Whether railroad was negligent, whether employee
assumed risk, and whether he was a mere volunteer, not
discussed by this court where there was adequate evidence
for submission to jury, no evident, material error in charge,
where both state courts below have sustained judgment, and
no special circumstances exist. New York Cent. R. R. v.
Tonsellito...
360
15. Finding no reason for disturbing the finding of both
state courts as to defendant's negligence, and no exceptional
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT-Continued.
circumstances, this court merely announces conclusion.
Southern Ry. v. Puckett. . . .
16. Maintaining trolley pole closer to the track than others
on the line, and so close that conductor cannot safely dis-
charge duties, ample ground for finding of negligence by
jury. Washington Ry. & Elec. Co. v. Scala.
(4) Diverse Citizenship and Removal.
17. Case, under act cannot be removed to District Court
upon ground of diverse citizenship. Southern Ry. v. Puckett. 571
(5) Parent's Right of Action.
18. Father, who by state law is entitled to son's earnings
during minority, may recover damages for son's death.
Minn. & St. Louis R. R. v. Gotschall..
19. Act does not give father right of action for expenses and
loss of services in addition to son's right of action.
York Cent. R. R. v. Tonsellito..
(6) Jurisdiction of this Court.
20. Claim that Act should have governed will not give juris-
diction under § 237, Jud. Code, where action originally based
upon state statutes, and Act not set up in answer or other-
wise called to trial court's attention, and where state su-
preme court under state practice declined to pass upon
claim because not presented to trial court. Missouri Pac.
Ry. v. Taber...
21. This court may review by writ of error judgment of
Court of Appeals of District of Columbia in case arising
under the Act of 1908, as amended. Washington Ry. &
Elec. Co. v. Scala..
(7) Pleading and Limitations.
22. If declaration alleges that injuries caused decedent to
"suffer intense pain," amendment at trial, that he endured
conscious pain and suffering," does not introduce new cause
of action barred by 2 year limitation of the Act. Washing-
ton Ry. & Elec. Co. v. Scala...
EMPLOYMENT AGENCIES:
Washington law, forbidding business of securing work for
|