## Facts

- Mary Lee Box, as guardian of the four minor children of Josie Ellis, sued South Georgia Railway Company for wrongful death under Florida’s Death by Wrongful Act statutes in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction.
- Josie Ellis was deaf and routinely used the railroad track as a shortcut.
- Ellis was walking along the track when a South Georgia Railway train approached from behind.
- The train crew blew the whistle as the train approached.
- A brakeman testified that Ellis looked back toward the train and continued walking on the tracks.
- Crew members also yelled warnings to Ellis, but she did not move off the track.
- The crew applied the brakes when it became apparent Ellis would not get off the track, but the train could not stop in time.
- The train struck Ellis and killed her instantly.
- Although the brakeman testified Ellis looked back, Ellis never saw the train coming and could not hear the whistle or shouted warnings because she was deaf; the crew did not know of her disability.
- The record indicated the train was traveling at a reasonable speed, gave customary warnings, and the crew maintained a lookout.
- The first trial ended in a mistrial; at the second trial, the jury returned a verdict for Box.
- South Georgia Railway moved for a directed verdict, and later for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial; the district court denied each motion.
- South Georgia Railway appealed, arguing the evidence required judgment in its favor as a matter of law.

## Issues

1. Whether, applying Florida substantive law and the federal standard for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the evidence required judgment for the railroad rather than submission of negligence and contributory negligence to the jury.
2. Whether the district court erred by denying the railroad’s post-trial motions (judgment n.o.v. and new trial) after the jury found for the plaintiff.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the judgment for Box.
- The court held the evidence did not point so strongly in the railroad’s favor that reasonable jurors could not find liability.
- Because the record allowed competing inferences about what Ellis perceived, how the crew responded when her danger became apparent, and how Ellis’s deafness affected contributory negligence, the case was properly left to the jury.
- The district court therefore did not err in denying a directed verdict, judgment n.o.v., or a new trial.

## Legal Principles

- In a diversity case, state law governs substantive tort liability, while federal law governs the standard for granting a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
- A directed verdict or judgment n.o.v. is proper only when the evidence and permissible inferences so strongly favor one party that reasonable jurors could not reach a contrary result.
- Under Florida negligence law, questions of negligence and contributory negligence are ordinarily for the jury when the evidence supports more than one reasonable view of the facts.
- A railroad must use reasonable care in operating the train, including maintaining a lookout, giving warnings, and taking reasonable action to avoid injury when a person is seen in danger and appears unlikely to clear the track.
- Conflicts in testimony and credibility determinations (including what a pedestrian did or perceived and what the crew reasonably should have concluded) are for the jury, not an appellate court, when the record supports competing accounts.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit allowed the plaintiff’s wrongful-death verdict to stand because the evidence, viewed under the federal sufficiency standard and Florida tort law, permitted reasonable jurors to decide whether the railroad acted reasonably and whether Ellis’s conduct—including the limits created by her deafness—barred recovery as a matter of law.


Box v. South Georgia Railway Company, 433 F.2d 89 (1970)