EAST ST. LOUIS – Underwriters at Lloyd’s aim to overturn a $40,000 verdict they obtained against CSX railroad when they sought millions.
They moved for judgment as a matter of law on Nov. 4, after making an oral motion at trial before U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn.
Jurors rendered a verdict against Lloyd’s on Oct. 21.
They found CSX properly limited its liability to $10,000 each for four locomotives that crashed down a ravine in North Carolina.
Hurricane Florence caused the destruction in 2018, by washing rails out from under a train carrying the locomotives east for ocean transport.
Lloyd’s paid $5,840,360 to locomotive maker National Railway Equipment of Mount Vernon and sued CSX for reimbursement.
Federal law fixed venue in Southern Illinois because the shipment originated there.
Lloyd’s claimed a liability agreement between CSX and National Railway Equipment didn’t comply with federal law.
At a hearing in January CSX counsel Daniel Wolff of Washington said, “There’s evidence in the record that Lloyd’s was well aware of the terms of the agreement between NRE and CSX.
“They didn’t like it and so they filed this lawsuit but they were aware of it and they didn’t have to pay out right away.”
In February, McGlynn ruled that Lloyd’s could proceed to trial on whether CSX perfected a limitation of liability and on the question of the amount recoverable.
At a hearing in May he said, “You guys are trying this for the Seventh Circuit.
“You’re going to try to make a record.”
He said he thought the case would go to trial “because you guys are so far apart.”
He said it was either $10,000 or the full value of new locomotives.
“It’s an important case," he said. "There’s a lot riding on it.”
CSX counsel Charles Swartwout of Belleville stated in a trial brief that National Railway Equipment freely and knowingly limited CSX’s liability as law allowed.
Jurors saw it that way but Lloyd’s counsel Joanna Maxwell of Los Angeles challenged the verdict.
She claimed evidence for limitation of liability was insufficient to meet the controlling legal standard.
She claimed the law held CSX strictly liable for actual loss or injury to property.
She claimed CSX must unequivocally demonstrate that it complied with statute.
She claimed it shifted to shippers a risk the statute says the carrier must bear.
She claimed shippers inadvertently waive protections of federal law because they don’t know how the law works and what protections it affords.
She claimed CSX keeps its business murky and exploits the confusion of shippers.