Same Causation Standard Applies To Employers and Employees Under FELA (And Thus Jones Act)
April, 2007
Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. v. Sorrell, 127 S. Ct. 799 (2007)
The United States Supreme Court holds that the same causation standard applies to railroad negligence and employee contributory negligence under the Federal Employers Liability Act (“FELA”). Because the Jones Act specifically incorporates the liability standards applicable to railroad (FELA) accidents, the Sorrell resolution impacts general maritime law and admiralty practitioners.
Facts
Employee Sorrell was injured while working for Norfolk and sought damages under FELA, which makes a railroad liable for an employee’s injuries “resulting in whole or in part from [the railroad’s] negligence” but reduces any damages awarded “in proportion to the amount [of negligence] attributable to” the employee.
Missouri state courts apply differing causation standards to railroad negligence and employee contributory negligence in FELA actions. Specifically, an employee will be found contributorily negligent if his/her negligence “directly contributed to cause” the accident/injury, while railroad (employer) negligence is measured by whether the railroad’s negligence “contributed in whole or in part” to the injury. The employer/railroad causation standard has been described as “feather light,” justifying a liability finding where there is only “slight” causation. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 506, 77 S.Ct. 443 (1957) (“Under [FELA] the test of a jury case is simply whether the proofs justify with reason the conclusion that employer negligence played any part, even the slightest, in producing the injury or death for which damages are sought.”); Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc., 352 U.S. 521, 523, 77 S.Ct. 457 (1957) (same in Jones Act cause of action).
The trial court overruled Norfolk’s objection to the employment of different causation standards and the jury awarded Sorrell $1.5 million. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting Norfolk’s argument that the same causation standard should apply to both parties’ negligence in FELA actions. The Missouri Supreme Court denied discretionary review.
Analysis
The U.S. Supreme Court reversed, holding that a single standard of causation applies when assessing both the negligence of the railroad and the contributory negligence of a railroad employee in a FELA action. The Court declined to resolve, as neither fully briefed nor the issue for which certiorari was granted, the “proper standard” of causation to be employed in a FELA claim.
The Court stated that “[a]bsent express language to the contrary, the elements of a FELA claim are determined by reference to the common law.” Unless the common law principles are expressly rejected in FELA’s text, they are entitled to great weight in the Court’s analysis. At common law, the causation standards for negligence and contributory negligence were the same. Variation in standards of causation between employee and employer was not one of FELA’s express departures from the common law. Moreover, it is far simpler for a jury to “conduct the apportionment [of fault] FELA mandates if the jury compares like with like - apples to apples.”
The Court rejected Sorrell’s invocation of FELA’s “remedial purpose and [the Court’s] history of liberal construction.” Even assuming FELA’s broad purpose to benefit railroad (and therefore maritime) employees, this does not require the Court “to interpret every uncertainty in the Act in favor of employees.” In sum, the text of the Act “does not support the proposition that Congress meant to take the unusual step of applying different causation standards in a comparative negligence regime, and the statute’s remedial purpose cannot compensate for the lack of a statutory basis.”
Learning Point
While Sorrell has immediate significance in apportionment of fault in negligence actions under FELA (and thus the Jones Act) of potentially greater ultimate significance are the Court pronouncements hinting at its approach to the substantive standard of causation. Specifically, the Court’s determination that the same causation standard applies to both employer and employee negligence may now be on a collision course with the historical case law determinations that the “feather-light” or relaxed standard of causation is part and parcel of FELA’s broad remedial purpose to benefit railroad (and maritime) employees. Indeed, the Court’s opinion appears to invite FELA and/or admiralty practitioners to bring this challenge.
Back to CM Report of Recent Decisions (2007v1) 2007 Volume 1 Table of Contents
