BNSF Railway Co. v. Seats Inc.
349 P.3d 1096
Ariz. Ct. App.2015Background
- Employee Jeffery McKinney sued BNSF under FELA alleging injury from an unsafe locomotive seat; he later added seat manufacturer Seats, Inc. for products liability and negligence per se.
- BNSF filed cross-claims against Seats for indemnification and contribution if BNSF were held liable to McKinney.
- Seats moved to dismiss BNSF’s cross-claims, arguing they are preempted by the Locomotive Inspection Act (LIA); the superior court granted dismissal and certified the order as final under Rule 54(b).
- BNSF appealed, arguing its cross-claims are premised on the federal LIA standard of care (not a state-specific standard) and therefore are not preempted.
- The Arizona Court of Appeals considered whether LIA preempts state-law claims that rely on the federal standard established by LIA/regulations.
- The court reversed the dismissal, holding that state indemnification and contribution claims premised on LIA’s federal standard are not preempted and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether LIA preempts BNSF’s state-law indemnification and contribution claims | BNSF: claims are based on federal LIA standard of care, so not preempted | Seats: LIA field-preempts state common-law claims about locomotive equipment design/manufacture | Court: LIA preempts state-specific standards but does not preempt state claims that are premised on the federal LIA standard; claims survive |
Key Cases Cited
- Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line R.R. Co., 272 U.S. 605 (1926) (LIA occupies field for locomotive design and appurtenances)
- Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163 (1949) (LIA violations constitute negligence per se for FELA employee claims)
- Kurns v. R.R. Friction Prods. Corp., 132 S. Ct. 1261 (2012) (state common-law duties directed to locomotive equipment are preempted by LIA)
- Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. v. Ayers, 538 U.S. 135 (2003) (discusses allocation of FELA burdens and indemnification in related contexts)
- Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 464 U.S. 238 (1984) (federal occupation of a field does not always preclude state-law remedies for federal violations)
- Knoedler Mfrs. v. Del. & Hudson Ry. Co., 781 F.3d 656 (3d Cir. 2015) (LIA does not preempt state indemnification/contribution claims premised on federal standards)