Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Southern Ry. Co. Vs. Dantzler

Southern Ry. Co. vs Dantzler

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-16-1932
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/95607

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
286 U.S. 318
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Southern Ry. Co.

Respondent

Dantzler

Excerpt

southern ry. co. v. dantzler - 286 u.s. 318 (1932) u.s. supreme court southern ry. co. v. dantzler, 286 u.s. 318 (1932) 286 u.s. 318 southern ry. co. et al. v. dantzler. no. 787. submitted april 28, 1932. decided may 16, 1932. messrs. h. o'b. cooper and s. r. prince, both of washington, d. c., frank g. tompkins, of columbia, s. c., and sidney s. alderman, of washington, d. c., for petitioners. mr. wm. c. wolfe, of orangeburg, s. c., for respondent. mr. justice roberts delivered the opinion of the court. this is a companion case to no. 788, southern ry. co. v. youngblood, 286 u.s. 313 , 52 s. ct. 518, 76 l. ed. -, decided this day. the respondent's intestate was the engineer of the train known as extra 483 west. he had on his person after the accident his copy of the orders received at branchville. the negligence claimed is practically the same as in no. 788, and none is alleged as against any member of the decedent's crew or that of the train with which his engine collided. after the accident dantzler was taken to a hospital, where before his death he stated to two persons that the accident was his fault-that he forgot his orders and ran past the point where he was directed to pass the other train. page 286 u.s. 318, 319 for the reasons given in the opinion in no. 788 the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. so ordered

Full Judgment

SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. DANTZLER - 286 U.S. 318 (1932)
U.S. Supreme Court SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. DANTZLER, 286 U.S. 318 (1932)

286 U.S. 318

SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al.
v.
DANTZLER.
No. 787.

Submitted April 28, 1932.
Decided May 16, 1932.

Messrs. H. O'B. Cooper and S. R. Prince, both of Washington, D. C., Frank G. Tompkins, of Columbia, S. C., and Sidney S. Alderman, of Washington, D. C., for petitioners.

Mr. Wm. C. Wolfe, of Orangeburg, S. C., for respondent.

Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a companion case to No. 788, Southern Ry. Co. v. Youngblood, 286 U.S. 313 , 52 S. Ct. 518, 76 L. Ed. -, decided this day. The respondent's intestate was the engineer of the train known as Extra 483 West. He had on his person after the accident his copy of the orders received at Branchville. The negligence claimed is practically the same as in No. 788, and none is alleged as against any member of the decedent's crew or that of the train with which his engine collided. After the accident Dantzler was taken to a hospital, where before his death he stated to two persons that the accident was his fault-that he forgot his orders and ran past the point where he was directed to pass the other train.

Page 286 U.S. 318, 319

For the reasons given in the opinion in No. 788 the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

So ordered

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial