CompFox AI Summary
Javier Flores, an employee of Coffield Warehouse Company, suffered severe injuries, including leg amputations, when he was struck by railcars while attempting to repair a conveyer belt on company premises. Flores sued Coffield and Southern Pacific Transportation Company, alleging liability under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). Southern Pacific was granted summary judgment, which Flores did not appeal. Coffield also moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not a common carrier by railroad under FELA and that Flores' claim was limited to workers' compensation benefits. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Coffield, concluding that Coffield, primarily a grain storage and warehousing business, did not meet the four criteria to be classified as a common carrier by railroad under FELA, and thus was not liable to Flores under the Act.
Flores v. Coffield Warehouse Co. is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Texas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Texas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Javier Flores, an employee of Coffield Warehouse Company, suffered severe injuries, including leg amputations, when he was struck by railcars while attempting to repair a conveyer belt on company premises. Flores sued Coffield and Southern Pacific Transportation Company, alleging liability under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). Southern Pacific was granted summary judgment, which Flores did not appeal. Coffield also moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not a "common carrier by railroad" under FELA and that Flores' claim was limited to workers' compensation benefits. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Coffield, concluding that Coffield, primarily a grain storage and warehousing business, did not meet the four criteria to be classified as a common carrier by railroad under FELA, and thus was not liable to Flores under the Act.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.