Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 16 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 05-1935.,No. 05-1936.,No. 05-1933.,No. 05-1943.,No. 05-1940.,No. 05-1939.,No. 05-1946.,No. 05-1949.,No. 05-1932.,No. 05-1941.,No. 05-1928.,No. 05-1947.,No. 05-1923.,No. 05-1930.,No. 05-1945.,No. 05-1934.,No. 05-1929.,No. 05-1922.,No. 05-1950.,No. 05-1948.,No. 05-1944.,No. 05-1926.,No. 05-1942.,No. 05-1924.,No. 05-1938.,No. 05-1918.,No. 05-1937.,No. 05-1931.,No. 05-1925.,No. 05-1927.,No. 05-1920.,05-1918.,05-1920.,05-1922.,05-1923.,05-1924.,05-1925.,05-1926.,05-1927.,05-1928.,05-1929.,05-1930.,05-1931.,05-1932.,05-1933.,05-1934.,05-1935.,05-1936.,05-1937.,05-1938.,05-1939.,05-1940.,05-1941.,05-1942.,05-1943.,05-1944.,05-1945.,05-1946.,05-1947.,05-1948.,05-1949.,05-1950. |
| Citation | 447 F.3d 606 |
| Parties | Tom LUNDEEN, individually; Nanette Lundeen, and as parents and natural guardians of Molly Lundeen, a minor, and Michael Lundeen, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY; Canadian Pacific Ltd., Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. John Salling, individually; Lorenda Poissant Salling, individually, and on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Sebastian Poissant, a minor, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Dion Darveaux, individually, on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Kendall Darveaux, a minor; Brenda Darveaux, individually, on behalf of, and as a parent and natural guardian of Kendall Darveaux, a minor, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Larry Schafer, individually, and on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Jenna Schafer, a minor; Tami Schafer, individually, and on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Jenna Schafer, a minor, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Gerald Wickman Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Charles Swenson; Sandra Swenson, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Rebecca Behnkie, individually, and on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Nathaniel Behnkie, a minor, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Marilyn Carlson, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Larry Crabbe; Carol Crabbe, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Wilfred Dahly; Geraldine Dahly, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Denise Duchsherer; Leo Duchsherer; Joshua Duchsherer, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Judy Deutsch, individually, and on behalf of, and as natural guardian of Tyrone Deutsch, a minor, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Jo Ann Flick, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Leo Gleason, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Charlotte Goerndt, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Mary Beth Gross, individually, and on behalf of, and as parent and natural guardian of Brett Gross, a minor, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Darla M. Just, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Irene Clore Korgel, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Richard McBride; Linda McBride, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Richard Muhlbradt, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Lonnie Shigley, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Bobby Smith; Mary Smith, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Rachelle Todosichuk, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Shelly Hingst, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Nathan Freeman, individually, and on behalf of, and as parents and natural guardians of Ashlyn Freeman, a minor; Nicole Freeman, individually, and on behalf of, and as parents and natural guardians of Ashlyn Freeman, a minor Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Doug Weltzin, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Melissa Todd, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Ray Lakoduk, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Trent Westmeyer; Randi Lou Westmeyer, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Leroy Slorby, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. Mark Nisbet; Sandra Nisbet, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company; Canadian Pacific Ltd, Sued as Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Timothy R. Thornton, argued, Minneapolis, MN (Scott G. Knudson and Kevin M. Decker, Minneapolis, MN, on the brief), for appellants.
Bryan L. Van Grinsven, argued, Minot, ND (Collin P. Dobrovolny, Minot, ND, on the brief), for appellee.
Before BYE, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Canadian Pacific Railway Company (CP Rail) appeals the district court's orders allowing the Lundeens to amend their complaint and remanding the case to state court. We reverse and remand.
This action was originally filed by the Lundeens against CP Rail in Minnesota state court. They sued for personal injuries and property damages suffered as a result of a CP Rail freight train derailment in North Dakota. CP Rail removed to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota based on federal question jurisdiction. The Lundeens amended their complaint in an attempt to remove the federal question. The district court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction over what it construed to be remaining state law claims and remanded to state court. CP Rail appealed, challenging the order allowing the Lundeens to amend their complaint and the remand as improper forum shopping. Regardless of the merits of the forum-shopping argument, we note the amended complaint continues to claim, among other things, CP Rail negligently inspected their tracks as shown by failing to comply with the rules and regulations of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and we thus hold the district court continues to have jurisdiction through complete...
To continue reading
Request your trial
38 cases
-
Johnson v. MFA Petroleum Co.
...action unlike "other statutory schemes in which courts have found complete preemption." Id. Two years later, in Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., 447 F.3d 606 (8th Cir. 2006), the question arose whether there was a conflict between our decision in Chapman and our statement in Gaming Corp......
-
New Orleans & Gulf Coast Ry. Co. v. Barrois
...the plaintiffs' state common law claim of negligent track inspection against a railroad was completely preempted by the FRSA. 447 F.3d 606, 614-15 (8th Cir.2006). Whether a specific state statute or regulation is preempted by the FRSA may require a fact-intensive inquiry to determine the na......
-
Johnson v. MFA Petroleum Co.
...action unlike “other statutory schemes in which courts have found complete preemption.” Id. Two years later, in Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., 447 F.3d 606 (8th Cir.2006), the question arose whether there was a conflict between our decision in Chapman and our statement in Gaming Corp.......
-
Wisconsin Cent., Ltd. v. Shannon
...532 F.3d 682, 687-90 (8th Cir. 2008) (discussing this history, including that Court's earlier decision in Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co., 447 F.3d 606, 615 (8th Cir.2006)). As already noted, no similar action followed the Sixth Circuit's Although we have arrived at our conclusion t......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Railroad tort liability after the "Clarifying Amendment:" are railroads still protected by preemption?
...Thus, pre-emption will not lie unless it is 'the clear and manifest purpose of congress."), with Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific R.R. Co., 447 F.3d 606, 614 (8th Cir. 2006) overruled by statute 49 U.S.C.A [section] 20106 (2007) ("[T]here is no indication the FRA meant to leave open a state tort......