Opinion ID: 1322827
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: LIA claim

Text: We find, however, that the trial court erred in denying the JNOV motion on the LIA claim. Under the LIA, railroad carriers must ensure that their locomotives and all parts and appurtenances are in proper condition and safe to operate without unnecessary danger of personal injury. 49 U.S.C. § 20701 (2000). In addition, LIA regulations require that locomotives be provided with proper ventilation. 49 C.F.R. 229.119(d) (2003). But a carrier cannot be held liable under the [LIA] for failure to install equipment on a locomotive unless the omitted equipment (1) is required by applicable federal regulations; or (2) constitutes an integral or essential part of a completed locomotive. Mosco v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R., 817 F.2d 1088, 1091 (4th Cir.1987). In this case, Whaley argues that the locomotives he operated lacked proper ventilation. But he did not present any evidence that the locomotives and their parts were not in proper condition. Moreover, he did not present any evidence that CSX failed to install equipment that was required under federal regulations or that constituted an integral or essential part of the locomotive. Because Whaley did not present even a scintilla of evidence to establish a claim under the LIA, we hold that a fair, impartial, and reasonable juror could not have returned a verdict in Whaley's favor on the LIA claim. Consequently, we hold that the trial court erred in denying CSX's motion for JNOV on the LIA claim but properly denied the motion on the FELA claim.