49 CFR 213.119 - Continuous welded rail (CWR); plan contents
| Cite as | 49 CFR 213.119 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
14 practice notes
-
Mehl v. Canadian Pacific Ry., Ltd., No. 4:02-CV-009.
...rail anchoring,9 and defective track conditions10 Page 1117 are all covered by federal regulations. The Plaintiffs assert that because 49 C.F.R. § 213.119 does not prescribe any actual standards for the construction and maintenance of CWR rail it does not carry any preemptive effect. The Ei......
-
Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., No. 04-CV-3220 (JMR/FLN).
...that regulations which do cover CWR are too general for preemption purposes. The principal regulatory provision addressing CWR is 49 C.F.R. § 213.119. Under that section, railways using CWR are to adopt internal procedures regarding safety concerns specific to CWR. The regulations in effect......
-
Hughs v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., Case No. 5:15-06079-CV-RK
...duties that would impose additional requirements for training of engineers and conductors. Defendant also claims that 49 C.F.R. §§ 213.7 and 213.119 subsume the subject of training and preempt any common-law negligence theories addressing the same subject. In opposition, Plaintiffs first ar......
-
Hale v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., SD 36912
...law, Hale, as she did during the proceedings in the trial court, points to the federal regulations as contained in 49 C.F.R. §§ 213.118 and 213.119. These regulations pertain to track owners’ CWR and their CWR plans and may thereby make the violation of a track owner's CWR internal rules a ......
Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
-
Mehl v. Canadian Pacific Ry., Ltd., No. 4:02-CV-009.
...rail anchoring,9 and defective track conditions10 Page 1117 are all covered by federal regulations. The Plaintiffs assert that because 49 C.F.R. § 213.119 does not prescribe any actual standards for the construction and maintenance of CWR rail it does not carry any preemptive effect. The Ei......
-
Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., No. 04-CV-3220 (JMR/FLN).
...that regulations which do cover CWR are too general for preemption purposes. The principal regulatory provision addressing CWR is 49 C.F.R. § 213.119. Under that section, railways using CWR are to adopt internal procedures regarding safety concerns specific to CWR. The regulations in effect......
-
Hughs v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., Case No. 5:15-06079-CV-RK
...duties that would impose additional requirements for training of engineers and conductors. Defendant also claims that 49 C.F.R. §§ 213.7 and 213.119 subsume the subject of training and preempt any common-law negligence theories addressing the same subject. In opposition, Plaintiffs first ar......
-
Hale v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., SD 36912
...law, Hale, as she did during the proceedings in the trial court, points to the federal regulations as contained in 49 C.F.R. §§ 213.118 and 213.119. These regulations pertain to track owners’ CWR and their CWR plans and may thereby make the violation of a track owner's CWR internal rules a ......
Request a trial to view additional results