Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, ante,
p.
241 U. S. 211,
followed to the effect that the Seventh Amendment does not apply to
actions brought in the state courts under the Federal Employers'
Liability Act.
Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. v. Kelly, ante, p.
241 U. S. 485,
followed to the effect that, in estimating the amount of damages
recoverable under the Employers' Liability Act, the
interest-bearing capacity of a present award must be considered,
and the whole loss sustained by the beneficiaries during the period
that the benefits cover cannot be included in the verdict without
rebate or discount.
162 Ky. 427 reversed.
The facts, which involve the application of the Seventh
Amendment to cases in the state court under the Employers'
Liability Act, the construction of that act, and the validity of a
judgment thereunder, are stated in the opinion.
Page 241 U. S. 495
MR. JUSTICE PITNEY delivered the opinion of the Court.
This was an action under the Employers' Liability Act of
Congress of April 22, 1908, as amended April 5,
Page 241 U. S. 496
1910 (. 149, 35 Stat. 65, c. 143, 36 Stat. 291). It was brought
to recover damages for the death of Richard Dwyer, caused by the
negligence of the railroad company, while he was in its employ in
interstate commerce. The sole beneficiary was decedent's widow, who
originally qualified as administratrix and brought the action, but
has died since the allowance of the present writ of error.
Laying aside a contention based upon the
Seventh Amendment to the federal Constitution, which has been
disposed of in
Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis,
ante, p.
241 U. S. 211, the
only question raised relates to the method adopted in ascertaining
the damages. The jury returned a verdict for $16,000. On appeal to
the Kentucky Court of Appeals, it was insisted that this amount was
grossly excessive, and was the result of erroneous instructions to
the jury. It was contended that the verdict of $16,000, if placed
at interest, would yield an annual income greater than the amount
the widow would have received had she lived, and would yet leave
her the principal to dispose of at the time of her death. The court
overruled this contention on the authority of
Ches. & Ohio
Ry. v. Kelly, 160 Ky. 296, where the same court held that, in
such a case, the whole loss is sustained at the time of intestate's
death, and is to be included in the verdict without rebate or
discount. A reading of the opinion of the Court of Appeals in the
present case (162 Ky. 427) makes it evident that it was only upon
this theory that the court was able to reach a conclusion
sustaining the verdict. Since we have held, in
Ches. & Ohio
Ry. v. Kelly's Admx., this day decided,
ante, p.
241 U. S. 485,
that the theory is erroneous, it results that the judgment here
under review must be
Reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not
inconsistent with this opinion.
