Eighth Circuit Affirmed BNSF Railway Injury Award
The federal court upheld a $700,000 jury verdict for a BNSF conductor after a dispute over expert testimony.
Updated on Sept. 18, 2026 in Unions
Live Poll
Do you believe injured railroad workers should have greater legal access to higher damage awards?
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a $700,000 jury verdict awarded to BNSF Railway conductor Morgan Fitch. The court upheld the judgment after determining the jury properly weighed competing expert testimony regarding workplace injuries.
Why it matters
The ruling underscores the finality of jury decisions in personal injury litigation when courts determine that witness credibility was adequately assessed. It confirms the lower court's finding on damages while limiting recovery to the specific award granted.
The jury awarded $700,000 in damages for workplace injuries while denying a separate request for future earnings and benefits. The appeals court concluded that the jury acted within its discretion by favoring the railroad's expert testimony.
The players
Morgan Fitch
He is a conductor for BNSF Railway who sought damages for injuries sustained in the workplace.
BNSF Railway Co.
It is one of the largest freight railroad networks in North America, operating thousands of miles of track.
US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
This federal court hears appeals from district courts located in seven states in the central United States.
The details
Morgan Fitch sought compensation for injuries sustained during his employment, leading to a trial where BNSF Railway Co. offered expert testimony to counter the claims. The appeals court declined to overturn the verdict, finding that the jury was correctly tasked with evaluating the credibility of the conflicting medical and operational experts.
Timeline
September 18, 2026: The Eighth Circuit issued its ruling on the appeal.
Political Context
Opponents of expansive liability, including various railroad industry groups, often argue that strict judicial oversight is necessary to prevent excessive jury awards. This ruling reflects ongoing tensions between labor advocacy groups seeking broader compensation and rail operators defending against claims under the Federal Employers' Liability Act.
This decision clarifies that railroad employees pursuing injury claims are subject to the specific credibility determinations made by a jury. It serves as a reminder that courts typically defer to lower-court fact-finding regarding expert witness testimony in workplace injury litigation.
The takeaway
The appellate court decision emphasizes the difficulty of challenging jury-determined facts on appeal, particularly when they hinge on expert witness credibility. Plaintiffs in similar litigation should be prepared for the substantial hurdle of proving clear error in how a jury evaluated technical evidence.
Further reading
For more on labor disputes, visit the Unions section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Bloomberglaw.
Live Poll
Do you believe injured railroad workers should have greater legal access to higher damage awards?
