Browning, Kaleczyc, Berry & Hoven defends railroad employers in cases brought by railroad workers under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). For numerous reasons, a significant number of FELA cases are filed in Lewis & Clark County, Montana, where the offices of BKBH are located. As a consequence of our longstanding professional relationship with railroads in Montana, our firm is gaining significant experience in the specialized area of FELA litigation.
The FELA defense attorneys at Browning, Kaleczyc, Berry & Hoven understand the unique demands and challenges of defending cases brought under the FELA. For example, our analysis and litigation strategies incorporate careful consideration of the difference between FELA cases and ordinary negligence cases in terms of burden of proof, as well as the comparative negligence of the plaintiff. We are sensitive to the special risks involved in terms of liability and damages exposure inherent in FELA cases. We emphasize keeping our clients informed and actively involved at every stage of the litigation process.
Representative Cases:
Banks et al. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. (1996)
BKBH was counsel for over 40 hearing loss cases filed against the Union Pacific Railroad Company in Helena, Montana. All plaintiffs allege hearing loss as a result of exposure to noise during their work histories with the Union Pacific. After significant discovery and favorable rulings for Union Pacific on discovery issues the plaintiffs settled these cases. James Claar, et al. v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company (1991)
BKBH was Montana counsel for Burlington Northern Railroad Company in a toxic tort case brought under the Federal Employers Liability Act involving claims of over 30 former Burlington Northern employees. The employees allege they were exposed to a variety of toxic chemicals during their work history, which resulted in a variety of injuries including central nervous system disorders. Summary judgment was obtained in six test case plaintiffs from the U.S. District Court in Montana on the grounds that the six test case plaintiffs had failed to make a prima facie showing that any of their alleged symptoms were caused by a specific exposure to a specific chemical. The summary judgment was upheld on appeal in the 9th Circuit.
|
