Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Osborne

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Osborne

699 So. 2d 724, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8174, 1997 WL 394879

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 16, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2051

StatusPublished

This text of 699 So. 2d 724 (Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Osborne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Osborne, 699 So. 2d 724, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8174, 1997 WL 394879 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Florida East Coast Railway (FEC), appeals an adverse judgment in favor of its former employee, appellee, John W. Osborne (Osborne). We reverse.

Osborne brought this action under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act claiming he [725]*725was exposed to dust from insulation material that contained asbestos at the FEC worksite for several years. A review of the record reveals Osborne introduced no evidence to show that FEC had any reason to know of the dangers posed by asbestos during the period when Osborne was allegedly exposed.

In the absence of a showing that the FEC knew or had reason to know of of the alleged hazard, no claim of negligence existed as a matter of law, and FEC was entitled to a judgment in its favor. See Inman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 361 U.S. 138, 80 S.Ct. 242, 4 L.Ed.2d 198 (1959); Rubley v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 208 F.Supp. 798 (E.D.Tenn.1962); Santoro v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 148 F.Supp. 594 (D.C.N.J.1957); Bagley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 219 Ga.App. 544, 465 S.E.2d 706 (1995). This disposition renders it unnecessary to address the remaining issues on appeal. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment below with directions to the trial court to enter a directed verdict for FEC.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GERSTEN, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Florida East Coast Railway (FEC), appeals an adverse judgment in favor of its former employee, appellee, John W. Osborne (Osborne). We reverse.

Osborne brought this action under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act claiming he [725]*725was exposed to dust from insulation material that contained asbestos at the FEC worksite for several years. A review of the record reveals Osborne introduced no evidence to show that FEC had any reason to know of the dangers posed by asbestos during the period when Osborne was allegedly exposed.

In the absence of a showing that the FEC knew or had reason to know of of the alleged hazard, no claim of negligence existed as a matter of law, and FEC was entitled to a judgment in its favor. See Inman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 361 U.S. 138, 80 S.Ct. 242, 4 L.Ed.2d 198 (1959); Rubley v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 208 F.Supp. 798 (E.D.Tenn.1962); Santoro v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 148 F.Supp. 594 (D.C.N.J.1957); Bagley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 219 Ga.App. 544, 465 S.E.2d 706 (1995). This disposition renders it unnecessary to address the remaining issues on appeal. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment below with directions to the trial court to enter a directed verdict for FEC.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GERSTEN, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

699 So. 2d 724, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8174, 1997 WL 394879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-east-coast-railway-co-v-osborne-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack