Panama Railroad v. Pigott

Background

A seven-year-old boy named Pigott was run over while trying to cross a railroad track on a street in Colón, Republic of Panama. The suit was brought in the District Court for the Cristóbal division of the Canal Zone under the Panama Canal Act to recover for his injuries. The trial record showed the crossing was heavily used, many children were present in the afternoon, there were no gates or watchman, a hedge obstructed the child’s view, and the engine backing a boxcar had no lookout and gave no bell or whistle warning.

Reasoning

The main question was whether the jury could apply Panamanian law and find the railroad liable for the child’s injuries. The railroad argued the court failed to apply Panama’s law about employer responsibility and damages and that it could not be held liable if it had used due care in hiring servants or that pain damages were not recoverable. The Court rejected those rearguments of earlier law, held it was proper to leave the law of Panama and the issues about gates, flagmen, and other safeguards to the jury, and accepted that, given the child’s extreme youth, the jury could attribute the accident to the railroad’s conduct alone. The judgment for the child was therefore affirmed.

Real world impact

The decision leaves in place a jury verdict holding a railroad responsible where a busy crossing lacked basic safety measures and warnings, affirms that local Panamanian law may govern such cases in the Canal Zone, and upholds recovery for the injured child.