Loveless v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad
Loveless v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
This cause was submitted and considered under new rule 46, and the opinion of the court was prepared by Mr. Justice Mayfield.
*588 The complaint seeks recovery under the federal Employers’ Liability Act, but the proof fails to bring the case within the influence of said act, under the authority of Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Winters, 242 U. S. 353 , 37 Sup. Ct. 170, 61 L. Ed. —, and our own case of Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Carter, 195 Ala. 382 , 70 South. 655 . Hence the trial court did not err in giving the general charge for defendant.
The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
Anderson, C. J., and Mayfield, Somerville, and Thomas, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.