Legal Opinion

Lockley v. CSX Transportation Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 13, 2010No. 1292 EDA 2009PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

ALLEN, J.:

CSX Transportation Inc. (“Appellant”) appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Albert Lockley (“Plaintiff’) following a jury trial. We affirm.

The trial court summarized the facts and procedural history of this case as follows:

[Plaintiff,] Albert Lockley, age 53, commenced this litigation against [Appellant], pursuant to the Federal Employer’s Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. *387§§ 51-60, and the Federal Locomotive Inspection Act (FLIA), 49 U.S.C. § 20701 et seq.

Plaintiff alleged that [Appellant] failed to provide him with a reasonably safe place to work during 84 years of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Harman Ex Rel. Harman v. BorahSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Nickels v. Grand Trunk Western RR, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
  4. Berkeyheiser v. A-Plus Investigations, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Matson v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Parr, J. v. Ford Motor CompanySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Bennett v. A.T. Masterpiece Homes at Broadsprings, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Bruckshaw v. Frankford Hospital of the PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital of the Sisters of Christian CharitySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  5. Blumer v. Ford Motor Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API