Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Call For A Free Consultation Today | 317-505-1342

  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
Email

CALL

Photo of John M. McLaughlin, Tony W. Patterson and Paul S. Kruse

Helping You Put Your Life Back On Track After A Serious Injury

  1. Home
  2.  ► 
  3. Legislation
  4.  ► 
  5. Federal Statute Preempts State Products Liability Lawsuit Over Asbestos Exposure, According to Supreme Court: Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp.

Federal Statute Preempts State Products Liability Lawsuit Over Asbestos Exposure, According to Supreme Court: Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp.

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Oct 18, 2012 | Legislation, Products Liability, Wrongful Death |

After decades working on repair and maintenance of railroad locomotives, a man developed malignant mesothelioma. He sued multiple companies for alleged asbestos exposure, and the executor of his estate substituted in as plaintiff upon his death. After dismissal by the district court, which was upheld by the appellate court, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the matter in Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp., 132 S. Ct. 1261 (2012). It affirmed the lower courts’ findings that a federal statute preempted the plaintiffs’ state tort claims.

The federal statute in question, the Locomotive Inspection Act (LIA), 49 U.S.C. § 20701 et seq., was passed by Congress in 1915. The law requires railroad carriers to maintain locomotives “in proper condition and safe to operate.” 49 U.S.C. § 20701(1). The statute generally preempts state law claims for locomotive-related injuries. In Napier v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 272 U.S. 605 (1926), the Supreme Court reviewed the scope of the LIA’s preemption. It held that the law preempts lawsuits brought by railroad workers as well as passengers. The question presented in the Kurns case was whether it also preempted claims for injuries caused by alleged toxic exposure related to locomotive repair and maintenance, as opposed to injuries in locomotive accidents.

The decedent, George Corson, worked for the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad for about twenty-seven years as a machinist and welder, beginning in 1947. He performed locomotive repair by installing brakeshoes, and he performed maintenance on locomotive boilers by removing insulation. His last year of employment at the railroad was 1974. Several decades later, in 2005, Corson was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, a form of lung cancer associated with exposure to asbestos.

In a 2007 lawsuit in a Pennsylvania state court, Corson and his wife asserted causes of action for design defects and failure to warn against fifty-nine defendants who manufactured or supplied equipment used by the railroad. Defendant Railroad Friction Products Corporation (RFPC) allegedly sold locomotive brakeshoes that contained asbestos. Defendant Viad Corp was allegedly the successor-in-interest to a manufacturer and distributor of locomotive engine parts that also contained asbestos.

The defendants removed the case to federal court and moved for summary judgment on federal preemption grounds. The federal district court granted their motion, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal.

The Supreme Court considered several arguments from the plaintiffs as to why the LIA should not preempt their claims. They attempted to distinguish Corson’s situation from other cases that followed Napier, focusing on the fact that Corson’s injuries were the result of alleged chemical exposure, not a physical accident. They also argued that their failure-to-warn claim operated independently from the LIA, because it addressed alleged errors that occurred when the defendants manufactured or sold their products. Finally, the plaintiffs asserted that, because the LIA only applied to common carriers, not suppliers, until 1988, it did not apply in this case. The Supreme Court found that Napier broadly applied LIA preemption to any injury claim arising from locomotive equipment, and it therefore rejected all of the plaintiffs’ arguments.

The personal injury attorneys at Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse represent the interests of Indiana accident victims and their families, helping them to obtain compensation for their damages. To schedule a free and confidential consultation with one of our lawyers, contact us today online or at 888-532-7766.

More Blog Posts:

Indiana Father Plans to Sue Department of Child Services for Wrongful Death, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, September 6, 2012
Indiana Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Widow of Alleged Asbestos Victim, Allows Claim Against Contractor to Proceed, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, August 30, 2012
Study Ranking States’ Success at Injury Prevention Gives Average Scores to Indiana, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, July 6, 2012

What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 27, 2025 | Car Accidents

You're driving I-465 like you've done a hundred times before — fast, focused and trying to get somewhere. Then it happens. A sudden jolt, a loud impact, maybe the screech of tires or the crunch of metal. Everything feels disoriented for a second, but your mind starts...

The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 15, 2025 | Bicycle Accidents

Bicycling is a beloved activity for many in Indiana, offering a means of transportation and a way to enjoy the outdoors. Still, sharing the road with motor vehicles can present significant risks. To safeguard cyclists, Indiana has various laws that address bicycle...

Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Apr 28, 2025 | Wrongful Death

You can lose the ones you love for the most mundane reasons. A seemingly innocent meal purchased at a local grocery store can cost you more than you intended to pay. Late last year, grieving mother Shantria Weddle filed a wrongful death lawsuit. Weddle’s 12-year-old...

Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 31, 2025 | Car Accidents

We all know texting while driving is dangerous. But have you looked around your car lately? Modern vehicles come packed with screens, buttons and alerts that can pull your attention from the road just as quickly as a phone. And outside your windows are plenty of...

What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Car Accidents

Several factors consistently contribute to vehicular accidents in the Indianapolis area. Data shows the following are top causes of accidents in the area: Alcohol: Recent research conducted by Indiana University’s Public Policy institute finds that a top cause of...

What are unique factors of commercial truck accidents?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Truck Accidents

When driving on Interstate 465, I-70 or I-65 around Indianapolis, you’ve likely felt dwarfed by massive commercial trucks barreling down the highway. The sheer size disparity between your vehicle and a fully loaded semi creates potentially catastrophic consequences in...

Am I liable for a car accident on a slippery road?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 20, 2025 | Car Accidents

Heavy rain or snow can create hazardous driving situations. Wet roads can cause cars to slide or skid, making it hard to control your vehicle. Icy patches are even more dangerous, as they can be nearly invisible and cause sudden loss of traction. On snowy or rainy...

When Businesses Have a Duty to Protect Their Customers: The Foreseeable Attack

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Dec 12, 2023 | Premises Liability

On November 29, 2023, the Indiana Court of Appeals published its Opinion in Brummett v. Bailey, 23A-CT-683, slip op. Brummett is the latest case in a string of Indiana Court of Appeals decisions following the Indiana Supreme Court’s Goodwin v. Yeakle’s Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., 62 N.E.3d 384, 389 (Ind. 2016). In these cases, the courts have been grappling…

Thu v. Willis and the Necessity of Expert Medical Testimony

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Aug 28, 2023 | Car Accidents

On March 13, 2023, in a memorandum decision, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s decision for the plaintiff in a negligence complaint despite the defendant-appellant’s argument that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that the car accident at issue was the proximate cause of his injuries. In this case, Thu v. Willis,[1] Guy Willis Sr. (“Willis”)…

Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead: Protecting the Purpose of Underinsured Motorist Coverage

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 22, 2023 | Car Accidents, Insurance, Underinsured Motorist ("UIM") Claims

In a case determined in September 2022, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided an important and common issue for injury victims when dealing with their own insurance in its opinion in Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead. Many drivers who are injured as a result of an underinsured motorist turn to their own underinsured motorist coverage and medical payments coverage to…

« Older Entries

Recent Posts

  • What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?
  • The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana
  • Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases
  • Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving
  • What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

Archives

Categories

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

Contact Us Today

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Phone
317-505-1342

  • Follow

Indianapolis Law Office

251 North Illinois Street
Suite 1800
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Lebanon Law Office

225 West Main Street
PO Box 668
Lebanon, IN 46052
Chicago Law Office

One East Wacker Drive
Suite 2600
Chicago, IL 60601

Review The Firm

© 2025 Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw