The 10 Scariest Things About Railroad Lawsuit Aplastic Anemia

How to File a Railroad Lawsuit For Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Rail workers who suffer from occupational diseases such as cancer can file a lawsuit in accordance with the Federal Employers' Liability Act. However, it can be challenging to prove that the condition is a result of work.

For instance an employee may have signed a release when he first settled an asbestos lawsuit and later filed a lawsuit for cancer that may have resulted from those exposures.

FELA Statute of Limitations

In many workers' compensation cases the clock starts clocking on a claim when an injury is declared. FELA laws, however, allow railroad workers to file a lawsuit for lung disease or cancer long after the fact. It is imperative to make a FELA report as soon after an accident or illness as soon as it is possible.

Sadly, railroads often try to get a case dismissed by arguing that the employee did not perform the task within the three-year time frame. To determine when the FELA "clock" starts courts typically look to two Supreme Court decisions.

pulmonary fibrosis lawsuit 'll consider is whether the railroad worker has a reason to believe his or her ailments are related to their work. The claim is not void when the railroad employee goes to the doctor and the doctor states conclusively that the injuries are due to their work.

The second aspect is the amount of time between the moment that the railroad worker first began to notice symptoms. If the railroad employee has been having breathing problems for several years and attributes the issue to his or work on the rails then the statute of limitation is likely to apply. Please contact us for a no-cost consultation for any concerns about your FELA claims.

Employers' Negligence

FELA sets out a legal foundation for railroad employees to hold negligent employers accountable. Railroad workers are able to sue their employers in full for injuries suffered, unlike most other workers who are tied to worker's compensation programs with fixed benefits.

Our attorneys recently secured an award in a FELA lawsuit brought by three retired Long Island Railroad machinists who were diagnosed with COPD chronic bronchitis, chronic bronchitis as well as Emphysema because of their exposure to asbestos while working on locomotives. The jury awarded them damages of $16,400,000.

The railroad claimed that the plaintiffs' cancer wasn't linked to their job at the railroad and the lawsuit was barred because it was more than three years since they discovered their health problems were linked to their work at the railroad. Our Doran & Murphy attorneys were successful in proving that the railroad had never given its employees any information about the dangers of asbestos and diesel exhaust while they were at work and had no safety protocols to protect its employees from hazardous chemicals.

It is recommended to hire an experienced lawyer immediately, even though a worker may have up to three years to file a FELA lawsuit from the date they were diagnosed. The sooner your lawyer starts gathering witness statements, records, and other evidence, the greater chance there is of the success of a claim.

Causation

In a personal injury lawsuit plaintiffs must demonstrate that the actions of a defendant led to their injuries. mesothelioma lung cancer lawsuit is known as legal causation. It is vital that an attorney examines any claim before submitting it to court.

Railroad workers are exposed to a variety of chemicals, including carcinogens as well as other pollutants, from diesel exhaust by itself. The microscopic particles penetrate deeply into the lung tissue, causing inflammation as well as damage. Over time, these damages can lead to debilitating conditions like chronic bronchitis and COPD.

One of our FELA case involves a former train conductor who developed chronic obstructive respiratory asthma and other respiratory diseases after a long period of time in cabs without any protection. Additionally, he developed back pains that were debilitating as a result of his work in pulling, pushing and lifting. His doctor informed him that these problems were the result of his exposure to diesel fumes, which he claims, aggravated the other health issues he was suffering from.

Our attorneys were able to keep favorable trial court rulings as well as a small federal juror award for our client. The plaintiff claimed that the derailment of the train and subsequent release vinyl chloride into the rail yard affected his physical and psychological condition because he was afraid the possibility of developing cancer. However, the USSC determined that the railroad defendant was not the sole cause of his fear of developing cancer since he had previously waived the right to bring this kind of claim in a previous lawsuit.

lung cancer lawsuit from smoking

If you've been injured while working for a railroad it is possible to file a claim under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. Through this avenue, you can seek damages for your injuries, including the amount you paid for medical bills and the pain and suffering you have endured as a result of your injury. However this process can be complicated and you should consult an attorney for train accidents to know your options.

In a railroad dispute, the first step is to prove the defendant had the duty of good faith to the plaintiff. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant breached the duty of care by failing to protect them from injury. The plaintiff then has to prove that the breach of duty by the defendant was the primary cause of the injury.





For example an employee of a railroad who developed cancer as a result of their work on the railroad must prove that their employer did not adequately warn them of the dangers of their job. They must also prove that the negligence led to their cancer.

In one instance a railroad company was accused of wrongful conduct by a former employee who claimed that his cancer was caused by exposure to diesel and asbestos. We argued that the plaintiff's action was barred due to the fact that he had signed a prior release in another suit against the same defendant.