Lynch v. Northeast Regional Commuter Railroad
700 F.3d 906
7th Cir.2012Background
- Lynch, Metra employee, was injured on Oct 8, 2007 while installing a chain-link fence at a Metra site; top rail fell and struck him in the neck and shoulders.
- Lynch sued Metra under FELA for negligence; district court granted Metra summary judgment on causation.
- Lynch was a Bridges & Building mechanic; fence installation was routine but there was no formal training on fencing.
- Fence construction involved end posts set in cement, then top rails secured in cups; the top rail should not slip once properly installed.
- The hill at the site created a steep grade; evidence suggested the top rail may have fallen due to improper cutting or loosening, or due to grade-related issues; foreman was away, assistant foreman present.
- Appellate review found genuine factual disputes about causation and that circumstantial evidence and lay testimony could support a jury verdict under FELA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether causation can be proven by circumstantial evidence in FELA | Lynch argues causation can be inferred from circumstantial evidence | Metra contends causation requires direct evidence of breach causing the injury | Causation may be proved circumstantially; not required to be direct evidence |
| Whether expert testimony is required to prove causation in this FELA case | Lay and circumstantial evidence suffice to show causation | Expert testimony may be needed for causal connection | Expert testimony not required; circumstantial and lay evidence can support causation |
| Whether the district court properly addressed Lynch's breach-of-duty and inspection theories | Evidence showed inadequate training, unsafe methods, and failure to inspect could cause the rail to fall | Disputed whether these theories showed causation and whether evidence was admissible | District court erred by dismissing causation theories; evidence creates genuine issues of material fact |
Key Cases Cited
- Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R.R. Co., 352 U.S. 500 (U.S. 1957) (any part causation standard for FELA could suffice at trial)
- Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 372 U.S. 108 (U.S. 1963) (circumstantial evidence may support jury verdict in FELA cases)
- Lavender v. Kurn, 327 U.S. 645 (U.S. 1946) (jury may infer negligence where direct evidence is lacking)
- McBride, 131 S. Ct. 2630 (U.S. Supreme Court 2011) (reaffirms broad FELA causation standard beyond multi-actor cases)
- Coffey v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter R.R. Corp. (METRA), 479 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2007) (conjecture may support causation; lack of foreseeability evidence was the issue in Coffey)
- Harbin v. Burlington Northern R.R. Co., 921 F.2d 129 (7th Cir. 1990) (expert testimony not always required; common sense inferences permitted)