SCOTUS scuttles out-of-state FELA claims

(Source: Railway Age, May 31, 2017)
Written by  Stuart Chirls, Senior Editor Railway Age

The U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving BNSF Railway tightened rules on where injury lawsuits may be filed, making corporations less vulnerable to claims brought in plaintiff-friendly courts.

In an 8-1 ruling Tuesday, the justices threw out a decision by a lower court in Montana allowing out-of-state residents to sue there over injuries that occurred anywhere in BNSF’s network. In the practice known as forum shopping, the high court ruling bars state courts from hearing claims against companies when they are not based in the state or the alleged injuries did not occur there.

“BNSF is grateful to the Supreme Court for the clarification they provided in deciding this case,” the company said in a statement, and reported by Reuters.

The case involves two lawsuits against BNSF brought under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, a U.S. law that allows injured railroad employees to sue for compensation from their companies. One was brought by a BNSF fuel truck driver who sued in 2011 over a slip-and-fall accident in which he injured his knee. The widow of another railroad employee sued in 2014 alleging her husband was exposed to chemicals that caused him to die of kidney cancer.

The employees did not live in Montana and their allegations did not occur in the state.

The railroad argued that the Montana courts did not have jurisdiction over the cases. The Montana Supreme Court in May, however, ruled that because BNSF does business in the state, courts there can hear lawsuits against BNSF without violating due process rights guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution.

Even though BNSF has hundreds of miles of track and 2,000 employees in Montana, said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the majority, it cannot be held liable for “claims like [these] that are unrelated to any activity occurring in Montana.”

The ruling a “jurisdictional windfall” for large multistate or multinational corporations, wrote dissenting Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and that individual plaintiffs will be “forced to sue in distant jurisdictions with which they have no contacts or connection.”

Also in the majority was Justice Neil Gorsuch, the first ruling he has participated in since joining the court in April.