Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-8-1991

Abstract

Plaintiff-appellant John J. O'Connell appeals from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Metzner, J.), after a jury verdict in favor of defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation ("Amtrak"), dismissing claims asserted under the Federal Employers' Liability Act ("FELA"), 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq. (1988) and the Boiler Inspection Act ("BIA"), 45 U.S.C. §§ 22-34 (1988). O'Connell alleged that he had sustained a personal injury during the course of his employment with Amtrak and sought compensatory damages. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred by refusing to allow the jury to consider evidence of certain working conditions that existed at the time of his injury. He also argues that the court erred by prohibiting him from presenting to the jury the specific language of federal regulations promulgated under the BIA and by refusing to refer to the regulations in the jury instructions. Finally, he contends 1041*1041 that it was error for the trial court not to charge the jury on the defense of assumption of risk and on Amtrak's duty to inspect.

We hold that, under the FELA, O'Connell sufficiently demonstrated a link between the excluded evidence and the injury to require that the evidence be considered by the jury. With regard to the court's refusal to instruct the jury on the BIA regulations, assumption of risk, and the duty to inspect, we hold that the district court did not err.

We reverse and remand for a new trial at which the excluded evidence may be considered.

Comments

922 F.2d 1039 (1991)

John J. O'CONNELL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 264, Docket 90-7425. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued October 1, 1990.

Decided January 8, 1991.

New York Law School location: File #1074, Box #126

Download

Share

COinS