CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.

United States Supreme Court case

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 27, 2026
Entity authorityQ7431691 ↗
Source-derived summary

Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co., 205 U.S. 1 (1907), was a cause of action for the death of the plaintiff's intestate, Adam M. Schlemmer, while trying to couple a shovel car to a caboose.

Background

Facts

The decedent was killed while following orders to couple railway cars that did not have a coupling device required by the Safety Appliance Act (Act). Plaintiff filed an action against defendant railroad company for the wrongful death of her intestate under the Safety Appliance Act.

The shovel car was part of a train on its way through Pennsylvania from a point in New York, and was not equipped with an automatic coupler in accordance with Federal law. Instead it had an iron drawbar fastened underneath the car by a pin and projecting about a foot beyond the car. The drawbar weighed about 80 pounds and its free and played up and down. On this end was an eye, and the coupling had to be done by lifting the free end possibly a foot, so that it should enter a slot in an automatic coupler on the caboose and allow a pin to drop through the eye. Due to the absence of buffers on the shovel car and to its being so high that it would pass over those on the caboose, the car and caboose would crush anyone between them if they came together and the coupling failed to be made. Schlemmer was ordered to make the coupling as the train was slowly approaching the caboose.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.” as united States Supreme Court case. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Schlemmer, Buffalo and Rochester.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1907—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Schlemmer, Buffalo and Rochester providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.”, the useful work is to connect “united States Supreme Court case” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7431691. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1907.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co. primary sources, Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co. archive and Schlemmer research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway Co.” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.