Sells v. CSX Transp., Inc.

Full title: CRYSTAL SELLS, as Personal Representative of THE ESTATE OF LARRY SELLS…

Court: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

Date published: Aug 4, 2015

CASE NO. 1D13-4775 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Aug. 4, 2015)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1D13-4775

08-04-2015

CRYSTAL SELLS, as Personal Representative of THE ESTATE OF LARRY SELLS, deceased, Appellant, v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Appellee.

John S. Mills and Andrew D. Manko, The Mills Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant. Andrew Jackson Knight, II of Moseley Prichard Parrish Knight & Jones, Jacksonville; Richard Caldarone and Evan M. Tager, Pro Hac Vice, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Peter D. Webster of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Tallahassee, Wendy F. Lumish of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Miami, and Daniel Saphire, Assistant General Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Association of American Railroads.

PER CURIAM.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Waddell A. Wallace, Judge.
John S. Mills and Andrew D. Manko, The Mills Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant. Andrew Jackson Knight, II of Moseley Prichard Parrish Knight & Jones, Jacksonville; Richard Caldarone and Evan M. Tager, Pro Hac Vice, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Peter D. Webster of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Tallahassee, Wendy F. Lumish of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Miami, and Daniel Saphire, Assistant General Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Association of American Railroads.

ORDER ON APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR REHEARING, REHEARING EN BANC, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant's Motion for Rehearing, Rehearing En Banc, or, Alternatively, Certification, is denied. LEWIS and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR; SWANSON, J., CONCURS IN PART AND DISSENTS IN PART, WITH OPINION. SWANSON, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.

In recognition of the fact that I am in the minority in the disposition of this appeal, I defer to the majority's decision on the motion for rehearing or rehearing en banc, and therefore concur with the denial in this aspect. However, I would grant the motion regarding the request for certification, and I would certify the following question:

DOES A RAILROAD'S DUTY UNDER THE FEDERAL EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY ACT, 45 U.S.C. § 51, TO PROVIDE EMPLOYEES WITH A SAFE WORK PLACE WITH PROMPT MEDICAL CARE INCLUDE REASONABLY ANTICIPATING FORESEEABLE MEDICAL EMERGENCIES AND THE PROBLEMS THAT MAY ARISE IF THEY OCCUR IN A REMOTE AREA?