 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Pauly v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railways12/14/2004
Appellant challenges the summary judgment granted to respondent on appellant's Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) and Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) claims on the grounds that the district court erred by concluding that (1) he was not fraudulently induced into signing a FELA release-of-claims form, (2) his FELA claim was barred by the statute of limitations, and (3) he could not establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the MHRA because he was not qualified for the position from which he was discharged. We affirm.
FACTS
Appellant James A. Pauly began to work for the Northern Pacific Railroad, predecessor to respondent Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF), in 1969. Pauly alleges that during his years with BNSF, he was exposed to a variety of loud noises. In 1985, Pauly noticed that he was having difficulty hearing some voices. As a result, he had his hearing checked, found that he had bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, and purchased hearing aids.
In 1993, Pauly went to see Ronald D. Hanson, M.D., an ear, nose, and throat specialist in St. Cloud. After examining Pauly, Dr. Hanson wrote a letter which was copied to Pauly, stating that " rior to attributing [Pauly's hearing difficulties] to noise-induced hearing loss alone, it would be important to rule out an acoustic neuroma which can present with this audiologic pattern." Subsequent testing ruled out an acoustic neuroma as the cause of Pauly's hearing loss. Pauly was informed of these results in a letter from Dr. Hanson, dated November 29, 1993. Following this assessment, BNSF agreed to pay up to $750 of the cost of a hearing-aid evaluation and possible hearing aids. Pauly was fitted with hearing aids on April 4, 1994, and has been dependent on them since.
In May 1996, Pauly submitted a claim to BNSF for payment for hearing-aid repair. The claim was declined. Pauly then requested a report form to file a claim for hearing loss with BNSF. In October 1996, William H. Renney, BNSF general claims manager, sent Pauly a personal-injury report, the requested claim form, and a hearing-impairment questionnaire. Portions of the first two forms were filled out by Renney. Additionally, on the claim-report form, Renney attached a Post-It note to the section asking for the circumstances of the injury , stating, "In here write in - during RR career, exposed to noise incurred hearing loss both ears." The parties dispute the reason for this. According to BNSF, Pauly requested assistance in filling out the forms, and Renney was simply obliging by inserting information disclosed to him by Pauly. Pauly, on the other hand, suggests that Renney provided this information of his own accord to indicate how Pauly should respond to various questions.
On December 4, 1996, Pauly filed a hearing-loss claim with BNSF for hearing loss in both ears caused by railroad noise. On the hearing-impairment questionnaire, Pauly indicated that he had been told by an audiologist in 1994 that he may have had a hearing problem that was "related to work with the railroad."
Renney responded to this claim on December 16, stating, in part:
We have gone through all the documentation.... The type of loss you have is not loss generally associated with exposure to industrial noise, but rather loss due to aging and genetics, i.e., hearing loss a person is born with. As such, we do not accept responsibility for much of your loss. I am making an offer that is a bit higher than the average hearing loss claim settlement we are making with individuals.
Enclosed please find a Release of Claims form. This is in the amount of $5,000.00. This is the maximum we are willing to pa
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|