 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Biddle v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.8/22/2000
Plaintiff injured his feet and ankles by walking on large rock ballast in his employer's train yard and brought suit against this Defendant for those injuries in 1991. That suit was resolved. The current suit was brought by Plaintiff in 1997, alleging injury to his back from the same cause. In this case, Plaintiff testified that he had several incidents at work which caused strain to his back but that those resolved, and that walking on the rock caused his permanent back impairment. Co- workers testified for Plaintiff that the rock was too large and therefore unsafe. Supervisors testified that the rock was not dangerous. Two physicians gave ambiguous testimony as to causation. The jury found that the rock in the train yard was too large, and, therefore, Defendant was negligent. The jury also found that Plaintiff had failed to prove that his back condition was caused by Defendant's negligence. Plaintiff appealed, asking this Court to find that the jury verdict was not supported by the evidence and that the Trial Court had erred in an evidentiary ruling. We hold the Trial Court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary ruling and that the jury verdict is supported by material evidence. We affirm.
T.R.A.P. Rule 3; Judgment of the Trial Court Affirmed.
D. Michael Swiney, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Herschel P. Franks, J. and Charles D. Susano, Jr., J., joined.
OPINION
Background
Walter J. Biddle (Plaintiff) worked for Norfolk Southern Railway Company (Defendant) from 1967 until August 1996. His job as a carman required him to walk around the train yard inspecting and repairing freight cars on the tracks. His work area was covered with rocks called "ballast." Plaintiff walked on the ballast daily. There are various sizes or grades of ballast for various uses. The ballast used on the main train line is normally larger than the ballast in the yard. The company standard required that ballast on the main line be #3 ballast, rocks up to two inches in diameter. In the yard, the ballast was to be #5 ballast, rocks no larger than 3/4 inch in diameter. In Defendant's train yard in Chattanooga, the company standard was not met, as the ballast in that particular train yard generally was #3 ballast, not #5. For many years employees complained about the size of the ballast and the potential for ankle injuries and asked the company to replace the #3 ballast with smaller ballast, but this change was never made. Plaintiff injured his feet and ankles while working on the ballast in 1987, and his 1989 claim for that injury was addressed by this Court in an earlier lawsuit in 1997. Plaintiff brought this second suit under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) against Defendant on December 24, 1997, alleging injury to his back from working on the large ballast in the train yard.
Plaintiff sought medical treatment for back pain from neurologist Dr. David Rankine in June 1996. Dr. Rankine's medical records indicate that Plaintiff came to see him on September 3, 1996, complaining of "back pain on and off for years." He was 54 years old. MRI of the lumbar spine revealed L4-5 disc degeneration with minimal annular bulging and L5-S1 disc degeneration with bulging of the disc across the canal. MRI of the thoracic spine revealed moderate thoracic kyphosis and diffuse degenerative changes and end plate spurring but no herniation. MRI of the cervical spine revealed no significant abnormalities. Plaintiff soon left his job , and Dr. Rankine agreed with his assertion that he was unable to do the work because of pain in his back.
When Dr. Rankine was questioned, he was told to assume that Plaintiff had a prior injury to his fee
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|