Missouri Pacific Railroad v. David

Background

A railroad company hired James Lee David on April 1, 1923 to ride trains as a guard after repeated robberies near Kansas City. David had experience, was warned that robbers were desperate and likely to shoot, carried a pistol and a sawed-off shotgun, and said he would fight until he died. The company also employed a man named McCarthy to provide information about planned robberies; McCarthy was known to associate with criminal bands. On May 17, 1923, David was murdered. His administratrix sued under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act and won at trial; that judgment was later affirmed by a higher court before this review.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the guard or the railroad should bear responsibility when the guard knowingly accepted a dangerous assignment and partly relied on an unreliable informant. Citing the established rule that assumption of risk is a defense under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, the Court concluded David assumed the risk of criminal attacks. He understood the dangers, carried weapons, and received no promise of special warning or protection. Even if he knew McCarthy was employed, McCarthy’s unreliability and likely inability to give timely notice meant David could not reasonably expect protection through that person. The Court therefore reversed the verdict for the administratrix.

Real world impact

The ruling makes it harder for workers assigned to known, life-threatening duties to recover when they are killed in the dangers they were hired to face if they understood those risks and no special protections were promised. Employers may rely on the assumption-of-risk defense in similar situations where dangers were obvious and reliable warnings or protection were not guaranteed. The case was sent back for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.