Case Background
Eduardo Williams worked as a Trackman 1 for Port Authority Trans Hudson Corp., known as PATH. PATH operates a railroad system and provides rail transportation among multiple states. On December 13, 2024, Williams sued PATH in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. He brought one negligence claim under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, known as FELA. The lawsuit arose from a workplace incident on Track G7 in Newark, New Jersey. Judge Dale E. Ho presided over the jury trial in August 2026.
Cause
According to the Complaint, Williams was working on Track G7 on April 20, 2024. A coworker about 200 feet away allegedly tried to insert a tie from the third rail side. Williams alleged that the tie knocked over the third rail. The third rail mechanism then allegedly fell onto his left foot. The Complaint also alleged that the third rail structure lacked proper support during the tie insertion. PATH denied these allegations in its Answer.
Injury
Williams alleged that the falling rail crushed his left foot and injured his ankle. The Complaint described an open dislocated fracture that required multiple surgeries. His treating surgeon, Dr. Joseph Galloway, later described the injury in a video deposition. Galloway testified that he found a large wound on the inside of the foot, with exposed tendon and bone. He also identified dislocations of three metatarsals and fractures in the midfoot. One bone, the cuboid, had broken into many pieces. Galloway said he performed four surgeries between April and September 2024. He added that he did not allow Williams to walk on the foot for more than three months.
Damages
In the Complaint, Williams sought more than $200,000, plus costs and disbursements. He claimed physical, psychological, and economic harm. At trial, the parties stipulated that Williams had been out of work since April 20, 2024. They also agreed that he earned $27.49 per hour on that date. His job's pay rose to $31.64 per hour on October 13, 2024. The Court instructed jurors that they could consider lost earnings and pain and suffering.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Eduardo Williams
Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Marc Twyman Wietzke
Defendant(s): Port Authority Trans Hudson Corp.
Counsel for Defendant(s): Thomas Robert Brophy
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Williams asserted one count under FELA. He alleged that PATH failed to provide a reasonably safe place to work. He also alleged that PATH failed to warn, train, and supervise its employees. The Complaint further claimed that PATH failed to support the third rail structure properly. In addition, Williams alleged that PATH let an employee run the tie inserter despite a known history of substandard performance. He also claimed that PATH failed to provide adequate tools, manpower, space, and protective equipment.
At trial, Williams also claimed that PATH violated a federal railroad safety regulation. However, the Court ruled as a matter of law that the regulation did not apply. As a result, jurors did not decide that issue.
Defense
PATH admitted that it employed Williams from time to time. However, it denied the negligence allegations and raised 13 affirmative defenses in its Answer. PATH asserted that Williams was solely or contributorily negligent. It also alleged that he willfully violated PATH's safety rules. In addition, PATH pointed to a superseding cause and to the negligence of third parties. PATH further asserted that Williams failed to mitigate his damages. It also sought a setoff for any compensation Williams had received. At trial, PATH contended that Williams's own negligence caused his injuries at least in part.
Jury Verdict
On August 20, 2026, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Williams. Jurors found that PATH was negligent and that its negligence caused injury to Williams. They also found that Williams was negligent and that his negligence contributed to his injury. The jury assigned 95% of the fault to PATH and 5% to Williams.
The jury then awarded damages in four categories. It awarded $125,000 for past lost earnings and benefits. It awarded $1,055,000 for future lost earnings and benefits, discounted to present value. It also awarded $1,000,000 for past pain and suffering. Finally, it awarded $2,100,000 for future pain and suffering. Together, the four awards totaled $4,280,000. During deliberations, jurors had sent a note requesting the applicable life expectancy table.
According to the Judgment, the parties stipulated that PATH claimed two liens. The first was $194,348.69 for past medical expenses spent on Williams's behalf. The second was $2,199.20 for past wages paid to him. The parties also stipulated that both amounts be added to any verdict for Williams. With those additions, the total verdict came to $4,476,547.89.
The Court then applied the jury's finding that Williams was 5% contributorily negligent. That finding reduced his recovery by 5%, leaving 95% of the total verdict. As a result, the net verdict came to $4,252,720.50. Judge Ho entered Judgment for Williams in that amount on August 24, 2026. Based on the parties' agreement, the Court allowed PATH to withhold both lien amounts from its payment of the Judgment.
Court Documents:
Documents are available for purchase upon request at [email protected]
