Facts

On June 3, 2007, Union Pacific Railroad Company machinist plaintiff Christopher Haut was controlling a crane connected to a lifting device that was being used to lift a radiator out of a locomotive. The lifting device was compromised of a long steel I-beam, connecting chains, and clevises to hold the chains and I-beam together when it is connected to an overhead crane. The lifting device had been reported defective two days prior to this date because it was missing the required component parts; namely, the chains and clevises to hold the lifting device together.

On the day of this incident, Haut modified/repaired the lifting device by replacing the chains and by using bolts instead of clevises to hold the lifting device together. Haut and his co-worker made two unsuccessful attempts to lift the radiator out, but the radiator would not move because it was still connected to the locomotive. Haut's co-worker had incorrectly reported that the radiator had been completely disconnected from the locomotive. As Haut attempted the third time to lift the radiator out, the bolt on the lifting device exploded and hit Haut on the chin.

Plaintiff brought this case pursuant to the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. section 51 et seq.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that Union Pacific was liable because none of the machinists had proper training on how to remove the radiator from the locomotive; and the lifting device used by him was defective.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Union Pacific claimed that it provided a reasonably safe work environment for plaintiff; and, that plaintiff's own negligence caused this unfortunate accident.

Injuries

Plaintiff claimed chin laceration, headaches, cervical disc injury, cervical joint injury, and mild traumatic brain injury. He claimed that he needed radiofrequency neurotomies for the rest of his life due to the accident. Defense claimed that the event was a minor injury that resolved within three weeks of the accident. Defendant further claimed that plaintiff, through collaboration with his lawyer and doctors, manufactured the cervical injury and brain damage claim to inflate the value of the claim.

Result

Defense verdict. The jury found Union Pacific negligent, but that negligence did not cause plaintiff's harm.

Other Information

Plaintiff filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and, in the alternative, a motion for new trial. The motions were denied on Jan. 17, 2012. FILING DATE: Sept. 9, 2008.

Deliberation

five hours

Length

18 days