Federal Rail Safety Act Section 20109(a)(4) protects rail workers who notify their railroad of “a work-related personal injury or work-related illness.” Injuries usually are pretty obvious. But what qualifies as “a work related illness”? The federal court in Williams v. Ill. Cent. R.R. holds that any illness arising during the course of employment is included,
Connecticut false claims qui tam lawyer
When the FRSA’s 180 Day Filing Window Opens (and Closes)
a limitations period commences when the plaintiff has a “complete
…
Late Injury Report Discipline Results in Summary Judgment Against Railroad
Railroad defense lawyers love to file summary judgment motions because it delays the trial while padding their hourly bills. But the Federal Rail Safety Act now allows employees to turn such motions into a sword that guts the railroad’s defense.
The facts in Smith-Bunge v. Wisconsin Central, Ltd follow a familiar pattern. Todd Smith-Bunge felt…
Two More Federal Court FRSA Decisions
Railroads are running out of defenses to the Federal Rail Safety Act. Their initial “election of remedies” gambit is dead and buried. Their second line of defense–charging employees who report injuries with “falsification and dishonesty”–has been obliterated by the “inextricably intertwined” principle upheld by judges and appellate courts. In desperation,…
Bad Week For Pan Am Railways
Twice in the same week, Pan Am Railways has been slammed with the statutory max in Federal Rail Safety Act punitive damages: once from a federal jury expressing its outrage at Pan Am’s profoundly unsafe culture and again from a Judge whose excoriating decision describes that culture in damning detail.
The federal jury verdict came…