Leverett v. CSX Trans., Inc.,, et al, No. 2:2001cv00155 - Document 65 (S.D. Ga. 2005)
Court Description: MANDATE from USCOA reversing and remanding appeal to the District Court re: Order denying CSX's motions for summary jgm appeal #03-14508. Signed by Judge Unassigned Judge on 05/16/05. (jsr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Leverett v. CSX Trans., Inc.,, et al Doc. 65 Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUI T FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT April 14, 2005 No. 03-14038 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK D . C. Docket Nos . 90-00258-CV-5 & 90-00262- CV-5 FELTON CULLEN WILLIAMS, RICHARD L. CARTER, et al ., P1 aintiffs-,feel l ee s, versus OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, et al, CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC ., 1 No. 03-14508 D. C. Docket No . 01-00155-CV-2 JAMES LEVERETT, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of Gloria Leverett, Deceased, Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 Page 2 of 6 Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CSX TRANSPORTATION INC., Individually and as Successor in Interest to Seaboard Systems Railroad , Inc., The Seaboard Coastline Railroad, The Atlantic Coastline Railroad and The Georgia and Florida Railroad, Defendant-Appellant, GARLOCK, INC., et al, Defendants. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia JUDGMENT It is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the attached opinion included herein by reference, is entered as the judgment of this Court . ~jJD AS Mq Entered : April 14, 2005 For the Court : Thomas K . Kahn, Clerk B y: Gilman, Nancy MAY 1 3 2005 ' =S• COURT OF APPEALS AT4ANTA, GP• Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 WILLIAMS v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP . Felton Cullen WILLIAMS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, V. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, CSX Transportation, Inc ., Defendant-Appellant. James Leverett, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of Gloria Leverett, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee, V. CSX Transportation Inc ., Individually and as Successor in Interest to Seaboard Systems Railroad, Inc ., The Seaboard Coastline Railroad , The Atlantic Coastline Railroad and The Georgia and Florida Railroad, Defendant-Appellant, Garlock, Inc., et al, Defendants . Nos. 03-14038, 03-14508 . United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. A. pri7 14, 2005 . Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (Nos. 90 -00258-CV- 5, 90-00262-CV-5 and 0100155-CV-2) ; Anthony A. Alaimo, Judge . Before BLACK, RONEY and STROM*, Circuit Judges . * Honorable Lyle E . Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, sitting by Page 3 of 6 1927 PER CURIAM : These separate interlocutory appeals, Nos . 03-14038 & 03-14508, are again before this Court after the Supreme Court of Georgia's answer to our Certified Question of State Law. Plaintiffs are relatives, or personal representatives thereof, of Defendant CSX Transportation ("CSXT") employees who allege in the diversity jurisdiction case they were exposed at locations other than CSXT work facilities, such as at home, to asbestos fibers emitted from the work clothing worn by their CSXT-employee relatives, causing them, among other things, lung diseases . The district court denied CSXT's motions for partial summary judgments on plaintiffs' negligence claims under Georgia negligence law . We reverse . As we recently explained, "the district court held that Georgia negligence law imposed a duty of care on CSXT to its employees' family members who were exposed to that asbestos-tainted clothing." Williams v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp ., 369 F.3d 1269, 1270 (11th Cir.2004) . Because we found no published Georgia case on point, we certified the following question of Georgia law to the Supreme Court of Georgia : Whether Georgia negligence law imposes any duty on an employer to a third-party, non-employee, who comes into contact with its employee's asbestos-tainted work clothing at locations away from the workplace, such as the employee's home? 369 F .3d at 1270 . The Supreme Court of Georgia has now answered our question in the negative as follows, "Georgia negligence law does not impose any duty on an employer to a thirdparty, non-employee, who comes into contact designation . Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA 1928 Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 Page 4 of 6 WILLIAMS v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP . with its employee's asbestos-tainted work clothing at locations away from the workplace ." See CSX Transp., Inc. v. Williams, et al., 278 Ga . 888, 608 S . E .2d 208, 210 (2005). It was therefore error for the district court to deny CSXT's motions for partial summary judgment on the ground that CSXT owed such a duty of care . The judgment denying CSXT's motions for summary judgment are reversed and the cases are remanded to the district court for proceedings consistent with the Georgia State Law . REVERSED AND REMANDED . U.S . Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit West, a Thomson business , Saint Paul, Minn . Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 Page 5 of 6 0 . COURT OFPAS UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH ~~TYZO BILL OF COSTS CSX Transportation Appellant I Case No . VS . 1'N MAS K, KAHN CLERK ff3=`fifi510 8U- eE James Leverett Appellee Fed.R . App .P. 39 and 11th Cir. R. 39-1 (see reverse) govern costs which are taxable in this court and the time for filing the Bill of Costs . A motion for leave to file out of time is required for a Bill of Costs not timely received . INSTRUCTIONS In the grid below, multiply the number of original pages of each document by the total number of documents reproduced to calculate the total number of copies reproduced . Multiply this number by the cost per copy ( $ .15 per copy for "In-House", up to $ .25 per copy for commercial reproduction, supported by receipts) showing the product as costs requested DOCUMENT Repro. Method (Mark One) In-House Comm * Appellant 's Brief x Record Excerpts No. of Original . Pages 32 Total No . of Copies Total No. Documents Reproduced 1 23 z9' 11 CT. USE ONLY COSTS ALLOWED 6 2'6 49 COSTS REQUESTED U 0 Appellee's Brief Reply Brief X *Note : If reproduction was done commercially , receipt(s) must be attached. .0 5"E) TOTAL 115 .00 $ 397 .50 $ a REQUESTED ALLOWED I hereby swear or affirm that the costs claimed were actually and necessarily incurred or performed in this appeal and that I have served this Bill of Costs on counsel/parties of record. Attorneyfor. CSX Transportation (Type or print name of client) FOR COURT USE ONLY Costs are hereby taxed in the amount of $ (JI.'1Ji ~J _against MAY 13 2005 Issued on : Deputy Clerk MISC-12 (Rev. 12/98) Case 2:01-cv-00155-AAA Document 65 Filed 05/16/2005 Scott L . Poff Clerk, U .S. District Court 801 GLOUCESTER ST RM 229 BRUNSWICK GA 31521-7075 May 13, 2005 Appeal Number : 03-14508-CC Case Style: James Leverett v. CSX Transportation Inc . District Court Number : 01-00155 CV-2 TO: Scott L . Poff CC Randall Athley Jordan CC : Mary Helen Moses CC: Roger B . Lane CC : Administrative File Page 6 of 6
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
