 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Pomeroy v. Illinois Central Railroad Co.5/19/2005
This appeal arises from a jury verdict in favor of Plaintiff Billy K. Pomeroy (Mr. Pomeroy), finding Defendant Illinois Central Railroad Company ("Illinois Central") negligent and 100 percent at fault for injuries sustained by Mr. Pomeroy, a switchman/brakeman employed by Illinois Central. Mr. Pomeroy was injured on January 7, 1997, while riding a railroad car during a switching maneuver at Johnston Yard in Memphis. During the switching maneuver, a track switch (the A-15 switch) malfunctioned, resulting in the derailment of the car on which Mr. Pomeroy was riding and causing Mr. Pomeroy to fall. Mr. Pomeroy suffered injuries to his back as a result of the fall, but was able to return to work six weeks after the accident.
In October 1998, Mr. Pomeroy filed a complaint for damages against Illinois Central pursuant to the Federal Employers' Liability Act ("FELA"). In his complaint, Mr. Pomeroy alleged that Illinois Central negligently allowed the A-15 switch to become defective and negligently failed to provide a safe work environment. He averred that Illinois Central's negligence was the proximate cause of permanent injuries he suffered when the railroad car derailed and he was thrown from the car. He prayed for damages in the amount of $250,000 for lost wages and benefits, past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and mental anguish, and permanent physical disability. On October 9, 2003, Mr. Pomeroy moved to amend his complaint to increase damages to $500,000.
Illinois Central answered on November 23, denying negligence and notice of an unreasonable risk of harm within its control. It averred Mr. Pomeroy's injuries resulted from his own negligence, failure to follow safety procedures, and pre-existing ailments and infirmities.
The matter was tried by a jury October 6-10, 2003. Illinois Central moved for a directed verdict at the close of proof. The trial court denied the motion and the matter was submitted to the jury. On October 10, 2003, the jury returned its verdict assessing 100 percent fault to Illinois Central and awarding Mr. Pomeroy $500,000 in damages. The trial court entered an order on the verdict on November 6, 2003. Pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 50.02, Illinois Central moved the court to set aside the verdict and direct a verdict for Illinois Central in accordance with Illinois Central's motion for directed verdict. Illinois Central moved, in the alternative, for a new trial or for remittitur pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated ยง 20-10- 102. The trial court denied the motions on April 8, 2004, and Illinois Central filed a timely notice of appeal to this Court. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Issues Presented
Illinois Central raises the following issues, as we slightly re- state them, for our review:
(1) Whether trial court erred in denying Illinois Central's motions for directed verdict.
(2) Whether the trial court erred by failing to charge the jury with Illinois Central's requested instructions.
(3) Whether trial court's jury verdict form failed to correctly state the law pertaining to negligence actions under FELA and failed to accurately reflect the court's instructions.
(4) Whether the trial court erred in permitting Mr. Pomeroy's counsel to engage "in rhetoric regarding the calculation of damages during closing argument, which was inconsistent with the court's instructions to the jury."
(5) Whether the trial court erred in permitting Mr. Pomeroy's co-worker to express expert opinions regarding the practice of railroad employees.
(6) Whether the trial court erred in holding Illinois Central's employe
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|