# Darrell E. Brown v. Csx Transportation, Incorporated, a Corporation

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 1, 1994 · 18 F.3d 245

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9486494

## Case

- **Full name:** Darrell E. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INCORPORATED, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 1, 1994
- **Citations:** 18 F.3d 245; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 3519; 1994 WL 62799
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Kaufman
- **Judges:** Niemeyer, Chapman, Kaufman
- **Cited by:** 76 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9486494

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that when a court dismisses a pro se 19 plaintiff’s complaint, it must give the plaintiff leave to amend “[u]nless it is 20 absolutely clear that no amendment can cure the defect” in the complaint
- explaining FELA “plaintiffs are … required to prove traditional common law elements of negligence: duty, breach, foreseeability, and causation.”

## Opinion text

FRANK A. KAUFMAN, Senior District Judge,
dissenting:
While the question is certainly not free from doubt, I conclude that there was sufficient evidence of complaints by other employees of similar loud noise from retarders before the occurrence in this case, that CSX knew of the same and had made attempts to reduce the noise level, and that the retarder in question was not up to standard. In the light of such evidence, the district court appropriately submitted to the jury the issue of negligence, including the component of reasonable foreseeability, and was correct in denying the interim and post-trial motions of CSX for judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, I would affirm the judgment below and respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9486494. Public record. Not legal advice.