Citation network
Csx Transp., Inc. Vs. Mcbride
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 20, 2011
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2010 Csx Transp., Inc. V. McbrideSearch
-
Instead, relying on Rogers v. MissouriSearch
-
causation language, Urie v. ThompsonSearch
-
compared to that applicable in common-law tort litigation, Consolidated Rail Corporation v. GottshallSearch
-
proper so long as Rogers actually prescribes the causation definition applicable under FELA. See Patterson v. McLeanSearch
-
s concurrence in Norfolk Southern R. Co. v. SorrellSearch
-
CSX asks this Court to resurrect. The interpretation adopted today is informed by the statutory history, see Trainmen v. VirginiaSearch
-
ex rel. Virginia State Bar , 377 U. S. 1 , 3, the precedents on which Rogers drew, see, e.g., Coray v. SouthernSearch
-
s subsequent decisions, see, e.g., Ferguson v. Moore-McCormackSearch
-
Gallick v. BaltimoreSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito, JJ., joined. CSX Transp., Inc. v. McBrideSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Csx Transp., Inc. V. McbrideSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 10-235 Csx Transportation, Inc., Petitioner V. RobertSearch
-
s decision in Rogers v. MissouriSearch
-
F. 3d 388, 393, n. 3 (2010) (quoting Holmes v. SecuritiesSearch
-
prescribes the definition of causation applicable under FELA, that instruction was plainly proper. See Patterson v. McLeanSearch
-
Palsgraf v. LongSearch
-
s concurring opinion in Norfolk Southern R. Co. v. SorrellSearch
-
surface, the court reasoned, the employee was at fault because of his lack of attention to the spreading fire. Rogers v. ThompsonSearch
-
for in-jured railroad workers. Trainmen v. VirginiaSearch
-
test, Rogers cited Coray v. SouthernSearch
-
s injury. See Ferguson v. Moore-McCormackSearch
-
plurality opinion). A few years later, in Gallick v. BaltimoreSearch
-
See also Crane v. CedarSearch
-
Hilton v. SouthSearch
-
scenarios. Indeed, judges would have no warrant to submit such cases to the jury. See Nicholson v. ErieSearch
-
Moody v. BostonSearch
-
some of our pre- Rogers decisions invoked common-law formulations of proximate cause. See, e.g. , Brady v. SouthernSearch
-
that CSX requested was drawn from Brady , which in turn relied on a pre-FELA case, Milwaukee & St. Paul R. Co. v. KelloggSearch
-
But other pre- Rogers FELA decisions invoked no common-law formulations. See, e.g. , Union Pacific R. Co. v. HuxollSearch
-
Coray v. South-Search
-
as the dissent urges would show scant respect for the principle of stare decisis . Footnote 5 See Moody v. MaineSearch
-
Ulfik v. Metro-NorthSearch
-
Hines v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
Hernandez v. TrawlerSearch
-
Tyree v. NewSearch
-
Nordgren v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Claar v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Summers v. MissouriSearch
-
Sea-Land Serv., Inc. , v. SellanSearch
-
Little v. NationalSearch
-
Pressed on this point at oral argument, CSX directed us to two cases cited by its amicus . In Richards v. ConsolidatedSearch
-
the Sixth Circuit sent the case to a jury. In Norfolk Southern R. Co. v. SchumpertSearch
-
Oglesby v. SouthernSearch
-
s violation of a safety statute, however, is negligence per se . See Kernan v. AmericanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial