## Facts

- Vernon Grimes worked as a brakeman/conductor for Norfolk Railway Co. (Norfolk).
- On August 15, 1997, while Grimes was on duty, a car was parked on the railroad tracks and the train struck it.
- After the collision, Grimes and another railroad employee exited the train to perform a required post-accident inspection, which involved walking alongside and down the tracks near the ballast.
- The area next to the rails did not have a level, maintained walking surface.
- The ballast was steep and included large rocks that could shift and roll underfoot.
- Grimes attempted to walk at the edge of the ballast, which contained grass, weeds, dirt, and loose ballast stones.
- Grimes stepped into a hole about the size of a basketball and was injured.
- Grimes sued Norfolk under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), alleging negligent failure to provide a reasonably safe place to work by failing to maintain a safe walkway and by failing to meet Norfolk’s own standards for trackside conditions.
- Norfolk moved for summary judgment, arguing that providing and maintaining a safe walkway along its track miles would be unduly burdensome and that conductors rarely needed to walk along the tracks.
- To dispute Norfolk’s “rarely needed” claim, Grimes submitted affidavits from Norfolk employees stating that crews working that route had to stop and walk along the tracks on roughly 20–25% of their runs.

## Issues

1. Whether, on this record, a reasonable jury could find Norfolk negligent under FELA for failing to provide a reasonably safe walking area for employees required to inspect a train after a collision.
2. Whether Norfolk was entitled to summary judgment based on its contention that trackside walkway maintenance would be too burdensome and that employee foot travel along the tracks was uncommon.
3. Whether disputes about foreseeability, unsafe conditions, and FELA causation required trial rather than summary judgment.

## Decision

- The court denied Norfolk’s motion for summary judgment on Grimes’s FELA claim.
- The court concluded that the evidence created genuine disputes of material fact on walkway safety, the frequency with which employees needed to walk the area, and whether Norfolk’s conduct played a part in Grimes’s injury.

## Legal Principles

- Under FELA, a railroad has a non-delegable duty to use reasonable care to provide employees a reasonably safe place to work.
- FELA causation is satisfied if the railroad’s negligence played any part, even the slightest, in producing the injury.
- Summary judgment is generally inappropriate in FELA cases when the record would allow a reasonable jury to find unsafe conditions and employer negligence.
- Evidence that employees regularly must walk along the track area as part of their duties can support foreseeability and the need for a reasonably safe walking surface.
- A railroad’s claim that systemwide walkway maintenance would be difficult or expensive does not, by itself, resolve negligence as a matter of law when the reasonableness of precautions and the work-related need to walk the area are fact questions.
- Proof that the railroad failed to follow its own safety standards or practices may support a finding of negligence.

## Conclusion

Because Grimes produced evidence that the ballast and trackside area lacked a reasonably safe walking surface and that crews had to walk the route with meaningful frequency, the court held that negligence, foreseeability, and FELA causation presented jury questions and denied Norfolk’s request for summary judgment.


Grimes v. Norfolk Railway Co., 116 F. Supp. 2d 995 (2000)