## Facts

- Rodney Steven Biggs worked as a track laborer for Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis.
- Biggs and coworker Robert Parr were in a toolshed under the supervision of track foreman Ron Gartner.
- Parr asked Gartner whether he could “beat up Biggs,” after which Gartner left the shed.
- Parr then punched Biggs in the jaw; the altercation continued outside, including threats involving railroad tools.
- After the initial confrontation ended and Biggs returned to work, Parr later struck Biggs on the head with a railroad spike, causing injury.
- Biggs sued the railroad under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), alleging negligent failure to protect him, failure to provide a reasonably safe workplace, and negligent retention of Parr as an “ill-tempered and vicious” employee.
- A jury found for Biggs, and the trial court entered judgment; the railroad appealed and argued the evidence required a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV).

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient under FELA to allow a finding that the railroad was negligent in connection with Parr’s assault on Biggs.
2. Whether the railroad (through Gartner or otherwise) had actual or constructive notice of Parr’s dangerous propensities or of a foreseeable risk of assault.
3. Whether the trial court erred by denying the railroad’s motions for a directed verdict and JNOV.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the judgment for Biggs and directed entry of judgment for the railroad.
- The court held the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to prove the railroad knew or should have known of Parr’s violent tendencies or of a reasonably foreseeable risk of the assault.
- Parr’s question to Gartner did not, without more, establish actual notice of an imminent assault or a later spike attack requiring protective action.
- Because foreseeability and notice were not supported by the evidence, Biggs’s theories of negligent retention, failure to protect, and unsafe workplace failed, and judgment as a matter of law was required.

## Legal Principles

- Under FELA, a railroad must exercise reasonable care to provide employees a reasonably safe place to work, and liability requires proof of employer negligence.
- FELA does not make the employer an insurer; the plaintiff must show the employer knew or should have known of a hazard and failed to take reasonable precautions.
- For coworker assaults, employer liability generally requires actual or constructive notice of the assailant’s violent propensities or conditions making the assault reasonably foreseeable.
- A jury verdict cannot stand where the record lacks evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer foreseeability and negligent failure to act; in that circumstance, a directed verdict or JNOV is proper.

## Conclusion

The court set aside the plaintiff’s FELA verdict because the record did not support a finding that the railroad had sufficient notice to foresee and prevent the coworker assault, requiring judgment for the railroad as a matter of law.


Biggs v. Terminal R.R. Ass’n of St. Louis, 110 Ill. App. 3d 709, 442 N.E.2d 1353 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982)