Home Table of Contents

(No instructions are set forth.)

6 WAPRAC CH 73 NOTE 1Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

6 Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. Ch. 73 Note 1 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part VIII. Motor Vehicles
Chapter 73. Motor Vehicles—Railroad Crossings
(No instructions are set forth.)
The WPI Committee has withdrawn the instructions that formerly appeared in this chapter because the Federal Railroad Safety Act preempts state statutes in some circumstances. See 49 U.S.C. § 20106; Norfolk S. R.R. Co. v. Shanklin, 529 U.S. 344, 120 S.Ct. 1467, 146 L.Ed.2d 374 (2000). The federal circuits are not uniform on the issue of preemption. See extensive discussion at Lee v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Ry. Co., 245 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2001).
Practitioners may find state statutes addressing the operation of railroads at RCW 46.61.340, RCW 46.61.345, RCW Chapter 81.48, RCW Chapter 81.53, and RCW 35.22.280(9). Administrative regulations concerning the operations of railroad crossings are contained in WAC Chapter 480-60 and WAC Chapter 480-62.
General principles of negligence apply in railroad crossing cases unless the injured party is an employee of the railroad. A railroad employee is protected by the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51–60, which preempts state law. Seeberger v. Burlington N. R.R. Co., 138 Wn.2d 815, 982 P.2d 1149 (1999) (thorough discussion of the lesser standard of negligence required to take a FELA case to jury). But see Noice v. BNSF Ry., 383 P.3d 761 (N.M. 2016); Fair v. BNSF Ry., 238 Cal.App.4th 269, 189 Cal.Rptr.3d 150 (2015).
[Current as of March 2021.]
End of Document