Oscar Hines v. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. General Electric Company, Monsanto Company, and Penn Central Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a FELA plaintiff need only 24 Defendant contends that Plaintiffs’ deposition testimony is self-serving. (Reply at 2
• noting “there can be a jury question of causation when there is evidence that any employer negligence caused the harm, or, more precisely, enough to justify a jury’s determination that employer negligence had played any role in producing the harm”
• explaining a trial court is “justified in withdrawing . . . issue[s] from the jury’s consideration only in those extremely rare instances where there is a zero probability either of employer negligence or that any such negligence contributed to the injury of an employee.”
• witness was qualified via “considerable” experience and training
• interpreting Fed. R. Evid. 702

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).