Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Hiles, 516 U.S. 400, 8 (1996)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Cite as: 516 U. S. 400 (1996)

Opinion of the Court

Employee Coupling Accidents, 1892-1902 9


YearRailroad
Employees
Employee
Accidents
Employee
Coupler
Accidents
Percentage
Coupler
Accidents

1892821,41530,82110,69734.71
1893873,60234,45611,71033.99
1894779,60825,2457,49129.67
1895785,03427,5078,42830.64
1896826,62031,8308,68627.29
1897823,47629,3606,49722.13
1898874,55833,7195,64816.75
1899928,92437,1335,47714.75
19001,017,65342,1934,1989.95
19011,071,16943,8172,9666.77
19021,189,31553,4932,2564.22

B

As originally passed, § 2 of the SAA provided:

"[I]t shall be unlawful for any . . . common carrier to haul or permit to be hauled or used on its line any car used in moving interstate traffic not equipped with couplers coupling automatically by impact, and which can be uncoupled[,] without the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars." Act of Mar. 2, 1893, 27 Stat. 531, 45 U. S. C. § 2 (1988 ed.), recodified, as amended, 49 U. S. C. § 20302(a).10

The text of § 2 requires that rail cars be equipped with automatic couplers and that all couplers be sufficiently compatible

9 Clark 207.

10 In Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co., 196 U. S. 1, 18-19 (1904), we clarified that the statute should be read as though there were a comma after the word "uncoupled," so that the words "without the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars" applies to both coupling and uncoupling. When Congress recodified the SAA in 1994, it placed a comma behind the word "uncoupled." See 49 U. S. C. § 20302(a)(1)(A).

407

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007