Lexplug logoLexplug

Lancaster v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
773 F.2d 807 (1985)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

An employee's claim against a railroad for intentional torts involving physical contact or the threat of it, such as assault and battery, is actionable under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) and is not preempted by the Railway Labor Act's (RLA) compulsory arbitration scheme. An employer can be held liable under FELA for such torts either through respondeat superior or through a theory of direct negligence in hiring or supervision.


Facts:

  • In 1975, Gary Lancaster, a mechanic for Norfolk and Western Railway, was menaced by his foreman, Lachrone, who screamed at him and shook a broomstick in his face.
  • Subsequently, another foreman, Funderburk, repeatedly subjected Lancaster to unwanted physical contact, including 'goosing' him, pulling his hair, and hitting his arms.
  • In 1976, Funderburk's harassment escalated when he twice stuck his hand down the back of Lancaster's pants, once squeezing his buttock and once inserting a finger into his anus.
  • Following this, Lancaster took a medical leave of absence and was diagnosed with anxiety.
  • In 1979, after returning to work, another supervisor, Boyd, swung a sledgehammer that flew from his hands and struck Lancaster, who believed Boyd had thrown it at him intentionally.
  • A few months later, another supervisor, Tynan, threatened Lancaster while holding a pickax handle, telling him, 'I'll put your name on it.'
  • About a week later, an enraged Tynan charged at Lancaster with the pickax handle and struck the doorframe directly above Lancaster's head.
  • Following the final incident with Tynan, Lancaster's mental condition rapidly deteriorated, leading to a diagnosis of schizophrenia that rendered him permanently unable to work.

Procedural Posture:

  • Gary Lancaster sued the Norfolk and Western Railway Co. in a federal trial court (U.S. District Court) under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA).
  • The case proceeded to a jury trial, which resulted in a verdict for Lancaster.
  • The jury awarded Lancaster $850,000 in damages.
  • Norfolk and Western Railway Co., the defendant, appealed the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, making it the appellant.
  • Gary Lancaster is the plaintiff-appellee in the appeal.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the Railway Labor Act's mandate for compulsory arbitration of employment grievances preempt an employee's Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) claim for damages resulting from intentional torts, such as assault and battery, committed by supervisors?


Opinions:

Majority - Posner, Circuit Judge

No, the Railway Labor Act does not preempt the employee's FELA claim. The RLA's arbitration mechanism is intended for disputes arising from the interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement, not for traditional physical torts like assault and battery. The FELA was specifically designed to provide a tort remedy for railroad workers injured on the job and has been interpreted to cover intentional torts that involve physical contact or the threat thereof. The court reasoned that arbitrators lack the specific competence to adjudicate issues of causation and damages for serious personal injuries. Because Lancaster's claims were for conventional torts where the employment context was merely incidental, they fall squarely within the FELA, and allowing the suit does not undermine the RLA's objectives. Furthermore, the railroad can be held liable under either the doctrine of respondeat superior, as the supervisors' actions were in furtherance of their work duties (albeit in an abusive manner), or a theory of direct negligence for failing to prevent a pattern of supervisory abuse.



Analysis:

This decision clarifies the jurisdictional boundary between the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) and the Railway Labor Act (RLA), ensuring that claims for traditional 'physical' torts remain in the courts. It establishes that railroads cannot use the RLA's arbitration framework as a shield against liability for violent or physically threatening conduct by supervisors, even if the conduct arises from an employment dispute. The opinion solidifies two distinct paths for establishing employer liability for intentional torts under FELA: respondeat superior for acts furthering the employer's business and direct negligence for failure to supervise. This dual framework strengthens legal protections for railroad employees facing workplace abuse.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Lancaster v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co. (1985) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Lancaster v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co.