Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Bradley LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, No. 19-2164 · judgment June 17, 2020
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) on claims brought by its employee, Bradley LeDure, under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. §51 et seq. and Locomotive Inspection Act (LIA), 49 U.S.C. §20701 et seq. LeDure's claims arise from injuries he sustained after slipping on the oily passageway of a UP locomotive which was part of a freight train that originated in Chicago and temporarily stopped in a UP railyard before continuing into Missouri. Although a federal safety regulation enacted pursuant to the LIA requires that locomotive passageways be kept free of oil and other slipping hazards and the FELA imposes negligence per se liability when that regulation is violated, the courts below held that the locomotive was not "in use" within the meaning of the LIA to trigger application of the regulation and dismissed that claim. As to the general FELA negligence claim, the lower courts held that the oily passageway was not foreseeable to UP even though it failed, for several days before the incident, to perform the mandatory daily inspections of the locomotive. In holding that the locomotive was not in use, the Seventh Circuit's decision conflicts with the holdings of this Court, as well as those of the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Circuits. In holding that LeDure's injuries were not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of UP's failure to inspect its locomotive, the Seventh Circuit's decision conflicts with this Court's holdings that a jury should be permitted to draw reasonable inferences from circumstantial evidence in FELA casesand, specifically here, to conclude that it is foreseeable that oil can accumulate as a slipping hazard on a locomotive passageway when the railroad fails to conduct mandatory daily inspections designed to detect and remediate those very hazards. Two questions are presented:
-
Whether a locomotive is in use on a railroad's line and subject to the LIA and its safety regulations when its train makes a temporary stop in a railyard as part of its unitary journey in interstate commerce, or whether such use does not resume until the locomotive has left the yard as part of a fully assembled train, as held by the Seventh Circuit below, contrary to the decisions of this Court and other circuits.
-
Whether the FELA allows a jury determination on the issue of foreseeability of harm from oil on a locomotive passageway when the railroad failed to conduct federally mandated daily safety inspections intended to discover and cure such hazards in the days before the injury incident, contrary to the longstanding decisions of this Court. GRANTED LIMITED TO QUESTION 1 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION. JUSTICE BARRETT TOOK NO PART.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
David C. Frederick
Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C.
For respondent
J. Scott Ballenger
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
3 cert-stage · 4 merits
(2 supporting pet./neither, 2 respondent)
Argument & decision
Argued March 28, 2022 — David C. Frederick · J. Scott Ballenger. Audio and transcript
Decided April 28, 2022. Opinion by Per Curiam.
Proceedings
- May 31 2022JUDGMENT ISSUED
- Apr 28 2022Adjudged to be AFFIRMED by an equally divided Court. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. Opinion per curiam.
- Mar 28 2022Argued. For petitioner: David C. Frederick, Washington, D. C.; and Colleen E. Sinzdak, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: J. Scott Ballenger, Washington, D. C.
- Mar 18 2022Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
- Mar 18 2022Reply of petitioner Bradley LeDure filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 09 2022Brief amicus curiae of Association of American Railroads filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 09 2022Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 07 2022Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.
- Mar 02 2022Brief of respondent Union Pacific Railroad Company filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 15 2022The record from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Illinois is electronic and located on Pacer.
- Feb 11 2022CIRCULATED
- Feb 07 2022Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.
- Feb 07 2022Amicus brief of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail Transportation Workers, et al. not accepted for filing.(Corrected version submitted) (February 09, 2022)
- Feb 07 2022Brief amici curiae of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail Transportation Workers-Transportation Division, et al. filed.
- Jan 31 2022Brief of petitioner Bradley LeDure filed.
- Jan 31 2022Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
- Jan 31 2022The record from the U.S.C.A. 7th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.
- Jan 28 2022ARGUMENT SET FOR Monday, March 28, 2022.
- Jan 26 2022Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 7th Circuit.
- Dec 15 2021Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
- Nov 23 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/10/2021.
- Nov 09 2021Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.
- May 17 2021The Acting Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration of this petition.
- Apr 27 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.
- Apr 23 2021Reply of petitioner Bradley LeDure filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 09 2021Brief of respondent Union Pacific Railroad Company in opposition filed.
- Mar 03 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 9, 2021.
- Mar 02 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 10, 2021 to April 9, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 08 2021Response Requested. (Due March 10, 2021)
- Feb 01 2021Waiver of right of respondent Union Pacific Railroad Company to respond filed.
- Jan 27 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
- Jan 10 2021Certificate of service filed with respect to amici curiae brief of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail Transportation Workers, et al.
- Jan 10 2021Certificate of compliance filed with respect to brief amici curiae brief of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail Transportation Workers, et al. .
- Dec 28 2020Brief amici curiae of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail Transportation Workers, et al. filed.
- Dec 10 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 14, 2021)