The residents who brought the suit against CSX were attempting to persuade the court to force CSX to pay for the expense of medically monitoring the area for an extended period of time to assess any risk the spill might be causing to the residents near the site of the derailment. The appeals court said the plaintiffs failed to produce evidence creating a genuine issue. Instead, the court says, that they relied on a conclusory statement by a doctor that, “a reasonable physician would prescribe for the Plaintiff and the putative class a monitoring regime.”
Daniel Bechenel Jr., a lead lawyer in the case, called the derailment an example of railroads putting people in danger and imminent risk by cutting safety precautions and repair standards. Though this may be true, the Appeals Court felt that the overall risk was too small to force CSX to pay for the medical monitoring.
Interestingly, The National Association of Manufacturers and eight other well-known Tort Reform groups, including the American Tort Reform Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Insurance Association, had filed amicus briefs arguing that the risk was too speculative to justify imposing expensive medical monitoring on CSX. Looking at this case from the perspective of a Georgia Plaintiff’s Attorney, it seems this may be another victory for big business.