Sterling v. Kansas City Southern Railway Company
2:22-cv-00584
E.D. La.Dec 6, 2022Background:
- Sterling worked for Kansas City Southern Railway (KCSR) from ~1970–2005 and alleges workplace exposure to asbestos, creosote, benzene, diesel exhaust and PAHs.
- Sterling filed a Mississippi FELA suit in 2002; in 2006 he entered a Settlement Agreement releasing claims arising from exposure to listed chemicals but expressly carving out "cancer originating in the lung."
- Sterling was diagnosed with colorectal cancer on June 3, 2015; he filed a new FELA/ILA complaint in this Court on March 8, 2022 alleging his cancer was caused by workplace exposures.
- KCSR moved to dismiss, asserting res judicata (release in the 2006 settlement) and that the FELA’s three-year statute of limitations bars the 2022 suit.
- Sterling argued the new claim is different (colorectal cancer not lung cancer), the settlement did not cover unknown future colorectal cancer, and the discovery rule delayed accrual until ~March 2021 when he saw an ad; KCSR replied that Sterling knew of exposures by 2005 and of his injury by 2015.
- The Court dismissed Sterling’s complaint with prejudice on statute-of-limitations grounds (finding accrual at or shortly after the June 3, 2015 diagnosis) and directed KCSR to state whether it will pursue its counterclaim.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata/settlement bars the new suit | Settlement released prior exposure claims but did not and should not cover later-diagnosed colorectal cancer | Settlement broadly released claims from exposures listed; release covers these harms (settlement controls) | Court did not reach res judicata because it dismissed on statute of limitations grounds |
| When FELA claims accrued under discovery rule | Accrual delayed until ~Mar 2021 (legal ad); discovery rule tolls limitations | Sterling knew of exposures by 2005 and was diagnosed in 2015; accrual occurred at or shortly after diagnosis | Accrual occurred on or around June 3, 2015; 2022 suit untimely under 3‑year FELA SOL |
| Whether Court should decide validity/interpretation of Settlement Agreement now | Settlement cannot bar colorectal-cancer claim because that injury was unknown in 2006 | Settlement is enforceable as written and negotiated, not mere boilerplate | Court declined to decide settlement validity given disposition on statute of limitations; asked KCSR whether it will pursue counterclaim |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must state a plausible claim)
- Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for complaints)
- Dubose v. Kansas City S. R.R. Co., 729 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir.) (discovery rule accrual for progressive occupational injuries)
- Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163 (1949) (FELA principles; causation and employer liability)
- Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc., 565 F.3d 228 (5th Cir. 2009) (complaint must contain factual matter raising reasonable expectation of discovery)