No announcement yet.

Roger Weith v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roger Weith v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

    Date Decided: Feb 11th, 2011
    Decided By: Ohio 6th District Court of Appeals (State)
    Court: Court of Appeals of Ohio, Sixth District, Lucas County
    Citation: 2011 WL 486842

    Plaintiff-Appellant, Roger Weith ("Weith") brought suit alleging negligence under FELA (link) for an injured shoulder (link: common injuries). Weith appeals from a directed verdict in favor of defendant-appelle, CSX Transportation ("CSX").

    Weith was employed by CSX as a locomotive engineer in Ohio. On a December night in 2004, he was assigned to couple two locomotives together. This process involves making three connections and allows the operating engineer to control both locomotives while underway. After making the mechanical and electrical connections, Weith struggled to connect two air hoses needed to link the locomotives' hydraulic brake systems. The air hoses are held together by a "glad hand" clasp that is engaged manually, and which locks in place via gravity. Each hose end must be parallel to the other or engaging the glad hand becomes difficult or impossible.

    Weith twice attempted to mate the two hoses from one side of the locomotive, and after failing to do so, noted that the hose ends were not perfectly parallel. During these attempts, Weith felt a "pop" in his shoulder. He then walked around to the other side of the locomotive where he was successfully able to maneuver the adjacent hose end into position and engage the glad hand.

    The "pop" Weith experienced was due to a rotator cuff injury which despite treatment has prevented him from working in the railroad industry. In his suit against CSX, Weith alleged that CSX violated provisions of the Locomotive Inspection Act ("LIA") in failing to maintain the locomotives in a proper and safe condition.

    Following trial, CSX moved for a directed verdict arguing that because Weith was able to successfully connect the air hose from the other side of the locomotive, there was no evidence of abnormalities in the hose position that would violate the LIA.

    The trial court granted CSX's motion for a directed verdict and Weith appeals.


  • #2
    say what?

    "locomotives' hydraulic brake systems"
    "Not the best, but one of the best!"
    all postings by this larryd is fictional public information and should not be construed to represent the positions views or thoughts of any particular company or person it bullish!t I has to use a disclaimer