Norris v. Central of Georgia Railroad

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that walkways are a part of track structure and thus immune from additional state regulation
• concluding that plaintiff's FELA claim alleg ing that defendant was negligent for not using smaller ballast was precluded because allowing plaintiff's claim to proceed would undermine FRSA's goal of national uniformity in railroad regulations
• refusing to create a circuit split and assuming that the FRSA could preclude FELA for purposes of analysis
• the FRSA precluded the plaintiff’s FELA claim that railroad should have used smaller ballast
• “To the extent that Norris’ FELA claim rests upon different ways by which [the railroad] might have supported the mainline track to comply with 49 C.F.R. § 213.103, the negligence claim is precluded.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).