Blackorby v. BNSF Railway, No. 15-3192 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseAfter plaintiff was disciplined by his employer, BNSF, for not promptly reporting a workplace injury, he filed suit claiming that BNSF's discipline violated the employee-protections provision of the Federal Railroad Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. 20109(a)(4). The jury awarded plaintiff damages for emotion distress. The court concluded, however, that its decision in Kuduk v. BNSF Railway Co. required plaintiff to establish intentional retaliation and that the jury instructions did not compel such a finding. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Colloton and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Federal Railroad Safety Act. The district court erred in instructing the jury that plaintiff need not establish intentional retaliation in order to prevail on his claim that his discipline violated the employee-protections provisions of the Act - see Kuduk v. BNSF Railway Co., 768 F.3d 786 (8th Cir. 2014); jury verdict for plaintiff is reversed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.