How to File a Railroad Lawsuit For Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Railroad workers who suffer from occupational diseases such as cancer are entitled to bring a lawsuit under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. However it can be difficult to prove that the condition is caused by work.
A worker, for example, may have signed a waiver after settling an asbestos claim. He later filed a lawsuit for a alleged cancer caused by those exposures.
Statute of Limitations under the FELA
In many workers' compensation cases the clock starts ticking on a claim the moment an injury is reported. However, cancer lawsuits allow railroad employees to file lawsuits for the development of lung disease or cancer, even years after the fact. This is why it's vital to obtain a FELA injury or illness report as soon as possible.
Sadly, the railroad will try to dismiss a case saying that the employee was not acting within the three-year time frame of limitations. Courts usually rely on two Supreme Court cases to determine when the FELA clock will begin.
union pacific railroad lawsuit to consider is whether the railroad employee had any reason to believe that their symptoms were related to their job. The claim is not void when the railroad employee consults a doctor, and the doctor states conclusively that the injuries are related to their job.
The second factor is the length of time from the time that the railroad employee first noticed the symptoms. If he or she has been experiencing breathing issues for a long time and attributes the issue to his or her railway work It is likely that the railroad worker is within the time limit. If you have concerns regarding your FELA claim, you should schedule an appointment for a free consultation with one of our lawyers.
union pacific railroad lawsuit establishes an legal foundation for railroad employees to hold negligent employers accountable. Unlike most other workers, who are bound to worker's compensation systems that have pre-determined benefits, railroad workers are able to sue their employers for the full value of their injuries.
Our lawyers recently obtained a verdict in a FELA lawsuit brought by three retired Long Island Railroad machinists who suffered from COPD, chronic bronchitis and emphysema as a result of their exposure to asbestos when working on locomotives. union pacific railroad lawsuit awarded them $16,400,000 in damages.
The railroad claimed the cancer of the plaintiffs was not linked to their railroad work and the lawsuit was time-barred because it was over three years since they discovered that their health issues were a result of their railroad work. Our Doran & Murphy lawyers were able to show that the railroad never informed its employees about the dangers of asbestos and diesel exhaust while they were at work and the railroad didn't have safety procedures in place to safeguard its employees from hazardous chemicals.
Although a person has three years from the date of their diagnosis to start a FELA lawsuit however, it is best to retain a professional lawyer as soon as you can. The sooner we can have our attorney begin collecting witness statements, documents and other evidence and documents, the more likely it is that a successful claim can be filed.
Causation
In a personal injuries action the plaintiffs must prove that the defendant's actions are the cause of their injuries. This is referred to as legal causation. This is why it's so important that an attorney take the time to review a claim prior to filing it in court.
Diesel exhaust is the sole source of exposure for railroad workers to a myriad of chemicals, including carcinogens pollutants and other pollutants. These microscopic particles penetrate deep into the lung tissue, causing inflammation as well as damage. Over time, the damages are accumulated and can cause debilitating conditions such as chronic asthma and COPD.
One of our FELA cases involves a former conductor who suffered from debilitating asthma as well as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease following decades of working in the cabs of trains without protection. Also, he developed back issues because of his constant pushing and lifting. The doctor who treated him said that the problems were caused by decades of exposure to diesel fumes. He claims that this led to the aggravation of the other health problems.
Our lawyers were able keep favorable trial court rulings as well as a small federal juror award for our client. union pacific railroad lawsuit claimed that the train derailment and the subsequent release of vinyl chloride from the rail yard impacted his physical condition and also his emotional state, as he worried about developing cancer. The USSC found that the defendant railroad did not have any responsibility for the plaintiff's anxiety about cancer since the plaintiff had previously renounced his right sue the defendant railroad in a previous lawsuit.
Damages
If you have been injured while working for railways, you could be able to pursue a lawsuit under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. By filing a lawsuit, you could be able to claim damages for your injuries, including reimbursement for medical expenses as well as for the suffering and pain you've endured as a result your injury. However this process can be complicated and you should talk to an attorney who has handled train accidents to better understand your options.
The first step in a railroad lawsuit is to establish that the defendant was liable to the plaintiff under a duty of care. The plaintiff must then prove that the defendant violated this obligation by failing in protecting the injured person from harm. The plaintiff must also show that the breach was the direct cause of their injury.
A railroad worker who develops cancer due to their work must prove that the employer did not adequately warn them about the dangers they are exposed to. They must also prove that their negligence caused their cancer.
In one instance, a railroad company was sued by a former employee who claimed that his cancer was caused through exposure to diesel and asbestos. We argued that the plaintiff's claim was barred by time because the plaintiff had signed a consent form in a previous suit against the defendant.