RUSH V. ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO. 399 F.3d 705 (6th Cir.) CASE BRIEF

RUSH V. ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO.

399 F.3d 705 (6th Cir.)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Rush (P) appealed the district court's denial of her motion for new trial following a jury verdict awarded in favor of Illinois (D), railroad company.

FACTS: Nine-years-old Rush and several friends began playing near a D train. At some point during these activities, Rush fell under the train and sustained injuries that ultimately required a below-the-knee amputation of his left leg. D conducts a switching operation in Memphis, Tennessee. During the switching operation, D employees hook and unhook railcars (a process known as 'coupling') to a locomotive engine. The locomotive engine then delivers the railcars to nearby destinations. A three-person crew performs the switching operation. A 'brakeman' physically couples and uncouples the railcars at each stopping point. The 'locomotive engineer' operates the engine along the rail line. The 'conductor' oversees the entire switching operation. All three D employees are responsible for the safety of the crew and passersby. P sued D in diversity alleging common law negligence and violations of Tennessee's 'Lookout Statute,' TENN. CODE ANN. 65-12-108. D got the verdict and P appealed. P, in part, contends that the district court erroneously permitted D to cross-examine Lockett and Moore with the interview transcripts. D counters that it utilized the interview transcripts to refresh the witnesses' memory pursuant to Rule 612 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner