Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Gooch v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company

• 1921 • 258 U.S. 22 • Taft Court
In the 1921 case Gooch v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company. The plaintiff, Mr. Gooch, was an employee of a subcontractor hired by the defendant to perform construction work on its railway line. He sustained injuries while working and sought compensation from both his direct employer (the subcontractor) and indirectly from Oregon Short Line Railroad Company under Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). However, FELA only...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taft Court
Term: 1921
Docket: 90
258 U.S. 22
42 S. Ct. 192
66 L. Ed. 443
1922 U.S. LEXIS 2233
Argued: Jan 13, 1922

Gooch v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1921 case Gooch v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company. The plaintiff, Mr. Gooch, was an employee of a subcontractor hired by the defendant to perform construction work on its railway line. He sustained injuries while working and sought compensation from both his direct employer (the subcontractor) and indirectly from Oregon Short Line Railroad Company under Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). However, FELA only applies to employees directly employed by railroads involved in interstate commerce; it does not cover workers employed by independent contractors or subcontractors unless they are deemed as "borrowed servants" acting under direct control and supervision of the railroad company at time of injury. The court found that Mr. Gooch did not meet this criteria because he was supervised solely by his immediate employer - the subcontractor - rather than being subject to any direction or control from Oregon Short Line Railroad Company during his work activities when injured. Therefore, despite acknowledging that railroads could be held liable for negligence causing injury to their own employees under FELA provisions, this liability did not extend beyond those directly employed thus exempting them from responsibility towards injuries suffered by contractor's staff like Mr.Gooch.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Gooch v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Company, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). He argued that FELA was not intended to cover all injuries sustained by railroad employees while on duty but only those directly caused by their employment. In this case, he believed that Mr. Gooch’s injury from a rock falling into his bunk in a boarding car did not arise out of his employment as required under FELA because it could have happened to anyone and was unrelated to any specific risk associated with railway work. Therefore, he concluded that there should be no liability for the company under federal law.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Feb 27, 1922
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms