## Facts

- Archie Armstrong, a brakeman employed by Louisiana & Arkansas Railway Company (L & A), was working a freight run from New Orleans to Alexandria, Louisiana.
- After being ordered to disembark near a crossing in the early hours of September 23, 1978, Armstrong was to be transported to the railroad office for switching work and a crew change.
- L & A arranged transportation by calling a taxicab from Miller Cab Company (Miller); the parties treated Miller as L & A’s agent for purposes of the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA).
- The cab stopped in darkness in or near the roadway; evidence supported findings that the cab was on or close to the paved portion of the road and did not use emergency flashers.
- As Armstrong was entering the cab, another car rear-ended the cab, injuring Armstrong.
- Armstrong sued under FELA, alleging negligence by the railroad through Miller’s conduct in stopping unsafely and failing to warn; L & A contended the collision was caused solely by the third-party driver.
- L & A filed a third-party claim against Miller and its insurer seeking indemnity if Armstrong recovered; the jury found for Armstrong on FELA liability, and the district judge dismissed the indemnity claim.

## Issues

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that negligence attributable to L & A (through its FELA agent) played some part, however small, in causing Armstrong’s injuries under FELA.
2. Whether L & A was entitled, under Louisiana law, to indemnity from Miller based on the negligence findings associated with the FELA verdict.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the FELA judgment for Armstrong against the railroad defendants.
- The court held the evidence allowed a reasonable jury to find negligence in the cab’s stopping location and lack of warnings and to find that such negligence contributed to the collision under FELA’s relaxed causation standard.
- The court affirmed dismissal of L & A’s third-party indemnity claim against Miller and its insurer.
- The court held the state-law indemnity claim was distinct from FELA liability; the district judge, as factfinder on indemnity, was not required to treat the jury’s FELA findings as determinative and could find no basis for shifting liability to Miller under Louisiana standards.

## Legal Principles

- Under FELA, a railroad is liable for employee injuries resulting “in whole or in part” from the negligence of the railroad’s officers, employees, or agents; causation is satisfied if negligence played any part, even the slightest, in producing the injury.
- A contractor providing transportation to an employee at the railroad’s direction may be treated as the railroad’s “agent” for FELA liability purposes.
- Concurrent negligence by a third party does not bar FELA liability if the railroad’s negligence contributed in any degree to the injury.
- A railroad’s right to indemnity against an agent or contractor is governed by applicable state law and does not automatically follow from FELA liability or from a jury’s implicit view of negligence under FELA’s causation standard.
- On appeal, FELA jury verdicts receive substantial deference when supported by a reasonable evidentiary basis; factual findings in a bench-tried indemnity claim are reviewed for clear error.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit upheld a FELA verdict where the jury could reasonably find that unsafe taxi positioning and lack of warnings contributed to an employee’s injury under the “slightest part” causation standard, and it separately upheld dismissal of the railroad’s Louisiana-law indemnity claim because FELA liability did not compel indemnity and the district court could independently reject indemnity on the facts and state-law requirements.


Armstrong v. Kan. City S. Ry. Co., 752 F.2d 1110 (5th Cir. 1985)