JAMES DAVID EDWARDS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
WESTERN & ATLANTIC RAILROAD, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A mutual mistake regarding the expected course of healing of an injury, rather than its nature, is insufficient to avoid a release executed after a settlement.
Plaintiff sued his employer under FELA, alleging negligence caused his ankle injury. The employer moved for summary judgment based on a settlement and…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Release Of Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff James David Edwards, a railroad switchman, sued his employer, defendant Western & Atlantic Railroad, under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq. Plaintiff alleged that the railroad’s negligence in maintaining a path next to some railroad tracks had caused injury to his ankle when he climbed off a train to throw a switch and stepped on a rock.
The railroad denied liability on the ground, inter alia, that plaintiff had accepted a settlement from the railroad and had executed an instrument releasing the railroad from further liability for the injury. Plaintiff sought to avoid the release on the ground that the parties had executed it under a mutual mistake as to the nature and severity of the injury.
After discovery, the railroad moved for summary judgment. The district court granted the motion in a written order, holding that there was no disputed issue of material fact and that as a matter of law there was no mutual mistake. Record at 97-102. Plaintiff appeals.
Upon careful examination of the record, we affirm. The undisputed facts show, at most, a mistake as to the expected course of healing of plaintiff’s injury, and not as to its nature. Such a mistake is not sufficient to avoid the release. See Robertson v. Douglas Steamship Co., 510 F. 2d 829, 836 (5th Cir. 1975); Heston v. Chicago and North Western R. Co., 341 F.Supp. 126 (N.D.Ill.1972).