공지사항

CSX Railroad Lawsuit

Residents of Curtis Bay have filed a class-action lawsuit against CSX Transportation. The lawsuit alleges that an accident at a CSX plant has led to air pollution, CSX Railroad Lawsuit including arsenic, silica, and lead.

The plaintiff was employed at CSX between 1962 and 2002. During his time with the company was exposed to diesel exhaust fumes. He suffered from lung cancer and lung diseases.

Damages

The CSX Transportation railway may have been responsible for a flood that caused massive damage to the small North Carolina community. The lawsuit asserts that the railroad workers let a culvert become blocked by debris which caused water to back up and pressurize until it burst out through the obstruction and into the town of Waverly. The resulting tidal wave destroyed homes, displaced residents and killed at least one person. The town's residents claim CSX did not warn them of the dangers of flooding, which they believe was caused by csx railroad lawsuit's lack of skill to clear the clogged canal.

Plaintiffs presented evidence that the vegetation at the Jordan Street crossing was so overgrown that motorists were unable to discern whether a train was approaching, which is sufficient to prove that CSX was negligent in maintaining the rail line. CSX contends that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting this evidence. CSX claims that the jury should have been informed that Mr. Hensley must prove that his fear of cancer was real and serious.

A southeast Georgia man has filed a lawsuit against CSX and claims that the company dismissed him as a result of his complaints about safety violations. Chase Highsmith claims CSX was negligent and did not follow federal regulations in maintaining rail cars. Highsmith claims he was dismissed from his job as a carman and railroad settlement car inspector after he reported violations of safety regulations for rail vehicles to the Federal Railroad Administration.

Premises liability

If a person is injured on another's property then they could be able to sue. It can be difficult to prove the cause, but the important thing is to prove that the party responsible had a legal obligation to maintain safety standards on their premises.

A home that floods, for example, could be avoided by maintaining the culverts, which carry floodwaters from the railroad settlement track and the creek. The lawsuit claims that CSX allowed debris to accumulate in these culverts to become blocked over time. This resulted in the water to back-up and unleash the floodwaters into a wall.

In the second, a jury handed plaintiff Robert Highsmith almost $7 million after determining that he had suffered injuries as a result of asbestos exposure while working for CSX. A judge has since overturned the verdict, claiming the jury was not properly informed on the law, and that it was denied the chance to discuss the testimony of a specialist witness.

Highsmith claims that he was employed by the railroad as an engineer, and then promoted to locomotive engineer. He is seeking reinstatement, a higher level of seniority, compensatory damages backpay and punitive damages with interest. The company, in turn, states that Highsmith violated company policies and did not have a justification for being absent from work.

Negligence

A man who is suing CSX for a sprain that he suffered at work claims that the company acted negligently by failing to provide an environment for employees that is safe. According to the suit, the plaintiff fell off a tank car when he released the vertical hand brakes. The fall caused him to suffer from post-concussion syndrome as well as a fractured leg and neck, and an injured disc on three different levels of his spine.

The lawsuit also asserts that the railroad cancer lawsuit did not maintain a safe distance between trains and pedestrians. The lawsuit claims that a misaligned track switch led to the collision, and the plaintiff was under stress due to demands from supervisors and threats of discipline. The lawsuit asserts that CSX was in violation of both the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) and the Railway Labor Act.

The survivors of the devastating flood in Waverly, Tennessee, are seeking to sue CSX and a local pair of property owners. The families of the victims are suing for $450 million in damages. They claim that the flooding could have easily been prevented. The lawsuit asserts that CSX allowed various debris to block the culvert under the bridge that runs under the train, which blocked the natural flow of water and backed up the waters. The lawsuit claims that CSX was negligent for failing to clear culverts, and piling debris on the nearby property owned by Sherry Hughey and James Hughey.

Intentional infliction emotional distress

Residents of Curtis Bay also suffer from anxiety and stress over future catastrophes. They are also concerned about the possibility of a repeat tsunami. The continual operation of the transfer facility also affects their safety and wellbeing. The lawsuit claims that CSX should be held responsible for the damages resulting from their actions.

The lawsuit also claims that CSX did not warn residents of the flood and the dangers of the bridge which it owns. The lawsuit also asserts that CSX did not fulfill its obligation to clear a culvert on its property. This led to a ponding effect, and eventually a tidal surge. Further, the lawsuit claims that CSX had been warned about the issue of flooding by its neighbors and New York state officials.

CSX also claims that the trial court's decision to instruct the jury in relation to mitigating damages was improper and uninformed. In particular, it left jury with a misguided belief that Miller was bound to exert an effort to resume working in a fair period of time following his injury. The charge of the trial court didn't clarify whether this obligation continued after Miller quit CSX on March 2003. Furthermore, it didn't declare that the trial court had the discretion to grant an apportionment ruling that would have permitted the jury to distribute liability between CSX's negligence and Miller's advancing age and history of smoking.