We practice railroad personal injury law on behalf of railway employees under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). It is a distinct area of legal practice, even though there are no official certifications for it. Just like there are divorce lawyers, corporate lawyers, drunk driving lawyers and patent lawyers, there are attorneys that practice railroad personal injury law. You may know someone who was injured on the job and got the royal run around. Fear no longer; now you know one. The days of the one-way ticket home after an injury, begging for the medical and compensation you are owed, are over.
The areas of practice of the Railroaders' Legal Network are throughout the United States. The practice of federal law often involves travel, whichever way you slice it. When necessary, our attorneys or investigators will fly or drive in to meet with you and accomplish what needs to be done. Our central location allows for ready airport access to all terminal locations.
FELA is a negligence statute that was originally passed in the early 1900's in an effort by the U.S. Congress to protect the rights of railroaders injured or taken ill in the course of their employment. In 1949, the Supreme Court spoke to the policy underlying the law, as follows: "It was designed to put on the . . . industry some of the costs for the legs, eyes, arms, and lives . . . consumed in its operations." Over the years, thousands of court decisions have interpreted the FELA bringing it to its present state, where any negligence on the part of the carrier which causes or contributes to an employee's injury, however slightly, is sufficient upon which to base liability.
Under the FELA, the employer must provide a safe place to work. The entire work environment is taken into consideration, including the task being performed, space, tools and equipment provided, and conditions under which the job must be performed. The employer has a duty to correct and/or warn of unsafe conditions of which it does, or should, know.
If an employee proves a case of negligence, compensatory damages are payable; however, the employer can claim as a defense that employee negligence contributed to the injury. That is called comparative negligence.
In such a case, the employer claims that the employee failed to exercise reasonable care for his own safety. If proven, an award is reduced by the percentage of comparative negligence.
For example, if an employee is entitled to collect $100,000.00 as a result of injuries, but the jury finds 10% comparative negligence, the award would be reduced to $90,000.00.
That is why it is so important not to allow yourself to be wrongfully blamed for an injury in an accident report, or in a statement given to a company claims agent.
Violation of either the Federal Safety Appliance Act (FSAA) or Boiler Inspection Act (BIA) automatically imposes liability or responsibility on the railroad for an injury. Comparative negligence is not an available defense to the railroad under such circumstances. Under the BIA, locomotives are required to be in proper condition and safe to operate. Under the FSAA, railroad cars are required to have efficient brakes, couplers that couple automatically by impact removing the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars, and secure grab irons and hand holds. Court decisions are constantly defining and evolving these concepts.
FELA liability can apply to carpal tunnel syndrome, heart disease, hearing loss, food or water poisoning, arthritis, tuberculosis, pneumonia, lead poisoning, dermatitis, asbestosis, black lung and other diseases and illnesses when caused, contributed to, or aggravated by negligence occurring in the course of employment.
An injury or illness does not automatically entitle an employee to compensatory damages under the FELA. Before an employee is entitled to money damages, it must be proved that the injury or illness resulted from employer negligence, or from violation of the Boiler Inspection Act or Federal Safety Appliance Act.
If you had a pre-existing condition but could work until an injury made it disabling, compensation can be payable for the aggravation of the underlying condition and the resulting disability. In other words, that a condition was preexisting does not automatically mean that you are not entitled to compensatory damages. Simply because a railroader had a pre-existing arthritis does not mean that his case is weak: IT'S NOT!
Compensatory damages equal compensation that can far exceed lost wages. Pain, suffering, mental anguish, inability to engage in social and recreational pursuits previously enjoyed, fear of future surgery, embarrassment, humiliation, scarification, and lost future earning power, are but some of the components of damages allowed under the railroad law. The elements of possible recovery in a particular case generally depend on the nature of the injury, and the way it has affected the employee. If you are injured and return to work and settle with the claims agent on your own for lost wages only, your glass may end up being only half full. Check with us first. BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY.
You have the right to pick your own doctor. We are automatically suspicious when a railroader is treated by a doctor selected by the carrier because being picked and paid for by the employer, a potential conflict of interest exists in situations where your best medical interests might differ from the carrier's best economic interest. This typically comes into play when doctor decisions have to be made concerning ability to return to work, work restrictions, whether an accident caused a disability, and/or permanent impairment. When in doubt, move out, and get your own doctor with undivided loyalty.
Once it is established that the carrier is liable for the initial injury, that responsibility extends to injuries caused by any medical malpractice of a health care provider rendering necessary treatment for the injury. If the employer selects the doctor for treatment, it is responsible for any malpractice whether or not negligence caused the initial injury.
The statute of limitations is three (3) years from either (1) the date of injury, or (2) when you become aware of an [occupational] injury and its cause, unless you were promised by the company that you would not be held to the three (3) year limit. If you think that you have a case, but it occurred more than three (3) years ago, we would have to go over all the facts before giving an opinion as to whether or not the time for bringing a claim has expired.
If you are injured, fill out an accident report and make sure that it describes any and all factors creating an unsafe workplace, such as darkness, slipperiness, co-employee negligence, insufficient or defective equipment, insufficient manpower, unsafe procedures, or anything else. A STITCH IN TIME SAVES NINE! Do what you can to make sure that an incorrect, incomplete, doctored, forged, or non-existent accident report does not exist in your case!
Often times, soon after an injury, claims agent will try to get a signed or taped statement from you. Insofar as he represents the carrier, that is where his allegiance typically lies. He will probably try to get his slant of the facts. It is the old, "Is the glass half empty or half full" adage. If you want to do what you can to make sure that the scales of justice are tipped as much as possible in your favor, cover all your bases: CALL US. Talking to a claims agent without first getting legal advice can result in your glass being half empty. LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS AND DERAIL TRAINS!
Once an injury has occurred and after receiving medical attention, the question often arises: Do I need a lawyer? An injury claim is not a simple, straightforward matter. There are many factors that come into play, such as the amount of compensatory damages, the nature and extent of disability, negligence, unseaworthiness, etc.
In 1964, the Supreme Court recognized that just having a favorable law on the books is not enough; you need experienced counsel to protect your interests, to wit:
" . . . It soon became apparent to the . . . workers, however, that simply having these federal statutes on the books was not enough to assure that the workers would receive the full benefit of the compensatory damages Congress intended they should have. Injured workers or their families often fall prey on the one hand to persuasive claims adjusters eager to gain a quick and cheap settlement for their . . . employers, or on the other to lawyers either not competent to try these lawsuits against the able and experienced [employer] counsel or too willing to settle a case for a quick dollar."
An attorney skilled in handling FELA cases can best advise you on all these factors. We can look into your case, without charge and without alerting the employer, and advise you if it is worthwhile to pursue. Once our initial investigation is complete, we discuss it with you and you decide whether or not you want to go forward. By checking things out, you are looking out for NUMBER ONE, and can hit the ground running if the need arises down the line, instead of playing catch-up later on when everything is hitting the fan economically and/or emotionally.
An injured railroader has the right to take his case to Court. Without a lawsuit, the company may be reluctant to pay full value. Some cases settle before trial. The choice of whether to settle or proceed to trial and verdict is your decision. If you have experienced counsel who the company knows can take them to the cleaners at trial, it stands to reason that they will offer you more money to settle than if you are represented by some local yokel ignorant of railroad law. Why gamble? Call 1-800-OBRYANS.
Income of the Railroaders' Legal Network is generated by successful prosecution of claims. Fees are a percentage of recovery. In other words, we do not make money unless you do. If we want more, we have to get more for you. Costs of litigation are unilaterally borne by the client in any case; however, we generally advance all costs.
Like a fingerprint, each case is different. The information provided herein should not be relied on as providing any legal opinions or guidance on your case. It is only meant to provide a brief overview of the constantly evolving law. With regard to your case, a specific examination of the facts would have to be made in order to opine how the law applies.