Corey White v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15185
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Corey White, a Union Pacific locomotive engineer, experienced recurring lower-back pain beginning in 2007–2008 while operating trains on the Clinton subdivision, attributing the pain to repeated "bottoming out" over rough track.
- White had a prior 1999 back injury but reported no significant back problems while working for IMRL (2001–2004) and was cleared by Union Pacific medical personnel in 2004.
- He first sought medical treatment for lower-back pain in October 2010; he saw a doctor for shoulder pain in September 2009.
- White sued Union Pacific under FELA in August 2012, alleging workplace conditions caused his lower-back injury.
- Union Pacific moved for judgment based on FELA’s three-year statute of limitations (45 U.S.C. § 56); the district court initially denied summary judgment but later entered judgment for Union Pacific at trial, finding the claim time-barred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did White’s FELA cause of action accrue for statute-of-limitations purposes? | White: accrual requires medical treatment/diagnosis; he wasn’t on notice until Oct 2010, so suit filed Aug 2012 is timely. | Union Pacific: White knew of recurring, work-related back pain by 2007–2008 and thus should have investigated and sued before Aug 2009. | Held: Accrual occurred no later than 2007–2008; White should have known injury and cause then. Claim is time-barred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fletcher v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 621 F.2d 902 (8th Cir. 1980) (latent-injury accrual rule; medical diagnosis sufficient but not required for accrual)
- Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163 (U.S. 1949) (FELA principles on latent occupational injuries)
- Fries v. Chi. & Nw. Transp. Co., 909 F.2d 1092 (7th Cir. 1990) (symptoms that impose a duty to investigate can trigger accrual absent diagnosis)
- Sweatt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 796 F.3d 701 (7th Cir. 2015) (plaintiff cannot delay accrual until medical diagnosis; objective inquiry into notice required)
- Green v. CSX Transp., Inc., 414 F.3d 758 (7th Cir. 2005) (fact question where pre-period symptoms were minor and did not objectively put plaintiff on notice)
- Campbell v. Grand Trunk W. R.R. Co., 238 F.3d 772 (6th Cir. 2001) (daily, job-related symptoms imposed duty to investigate; suit filed after diagnosis was untimely)