Opinion ID: 424926
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: conclusion

Text: 59 A federal interest embodied in the policies, but not the specific statutory provisions, of the FELA is insufficient to rebut the persuasive preemption of the RLA over Jackson's retaliatory discharge claim. Similarly, Farmer v. Brotherhood of Carpenters, Local 25, 430 U.S. 290, 97 S.Ct. 1056, 51 L.Ed.2d 338 (1977), does not support recognition of an exception to the preemption doctrine in this case because resolution of Jackson's claim requires consideration of the same issues that Jackson would have raised before an administrative tribunal had he pursued the grievance procedures of the collective bargaining agreement and the RLA. 11 60 The preemptive effect of the RLA is to divest the court below of subject matter jurisdiction and, consistent with the general rule that subject matter jurisdiction may be challenged at any point in the proceedings, Conrail is not estopped from raising that issue for the first time after the jury had returned its verdicts. 61 The jury award of compensatory damages for Jackson's FELA claim shows no evidence of tainting by the admission of improper evidence or argument. 62 This cause is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate the judgment and award of compensatory damages in favor of Jackson on his retaliatory discharge claim and to dismiss that claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The judgment in favor of Jackson on the FELA claim is affirmed. Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal. We express no view as to the allocation of costs reached by the judge below relative to the district court proceedings. 63 REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART. 64