Winder v. Union Pacific RR. Co.
296 Neb. 557
Neb.2017Background
- Kevin M. Winder, a Union Pacific (UP) conductor, injured his back on October 28, 2012 while releasing a railcar handbrake; he used the quick-release lever which did not release the brake, then turned the wheel and felt a sudden back injury.
- Winder required significant medical treatment including surgery and could not return to work.
- Winder sued UP under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), alleging a violation of the Federal Safety Appliance Acts (FSAA) that railcars must be equipped with “efficient hand brakes,” arguing the quick-release lever was inefficient.
- At trial Winder moved for a directed verdict on the FSAA claim at the close of evidence; the district court denied the motion.
- The jury returned a general verdict for UP; Winder appealed solely arguing the court erred in denying the directed verdict on the FSAA claim.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding that whether the quick-release lever’s failure established inefficiency under FSAA was a factual question for the jury given conflicting evidence about how commonly levers fail and whether the lever’s failure meant the handbrake did not function in the normal, natural, and usual manner.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UP violated FSAA by using a car with an "inefficient" quick-release lever | Lever failed to release the brake; that failure alone establishes the handbrake failed to function in the normal, natural, and usual manner as a matter of law | Failure of a quick-release lever does not automatically prove overall handbrake inefficiency; evidence showed lever failures are common and some industry practice accepts occasional nonfunction | Denied directed verdict; issue was for the jury because evidence conflicted on whether the lever’s failure meant the handbrake was inefficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Myers v. Reading Co., 331 U.S. 477 (1947) (FSAA inefficiency shown by specific defect or failure to function in normal manner)
- Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163 (1949) (FSAA violations may support recovery under FELA)
- Strickland v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 692 F.3d 1151 (11th Cir. 2012) (conflicting evidence on handbrake operation presents fact issue for jury)
- Beissel v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. Co., 801 F.2d 143 (3d Cir. 1986) (FSAA provides basis for claim and FELA provides remedy)