45 U.S.C. § 51 – Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) – Liability of Railroads for Employee Injuries
Table of Contents
Code Details
45 USC 51: Liability of common carriers by railroad, in interstate or foreign commerce, for injuries to employees from negligence; employee defined
Text contains those laws in effect on August 27, 2025
From Title 45-RAILROADS
CHAPTER 2-LIABILITY FOR INJURIES TO EMPLOYEES
Exact Statute Text
Click to view the complete statute text
Every common carrier by railroad while engaging in commerce between any of the several States or Territories, or between any of the States and Territories, or between the District of Columbia and any of the States or Territories, or between the District of Columbia or any of the States or Territories and any foreign nation or nations, shall be liable in damages to any person suffering injury while he is employed by such carrier in such commerce, or, in case of the death of such employee, to his or her personal representative, for the benefit of the surviving widow or husband and children of such employee; and, if none, then of such employee’s parents; and, if none, then of the next of kin dependent upon such employee, for such injury or death resulting in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the officers, agents, or employees of such carrier, or by reason of any defect or insufficiency, due to its negligence, in its cars, engines, appliances, machinery, track, roadbed, works, boats, wharves, or other equipment.Any employee of a carrier, any part of whose duties as such employee shall be the furtherance of interstate or foreign commerce; or shall, in any way directly or closely and substantially, affect such commerce as above set forth shall, for the purposes of this chapter, be considered as being employed by such carrier in such commerce and shall be considered as entitled to the benefits of this chapter.
45 U.S.C. § 51 Summary
This section of the U.S. Code, commonly known as the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), establishes a legal framework for railroad workers to seek compensation for injuries or death sustained while on the job. It applies to common carriers by railroad engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. Under this law, a railroad company can be held liable for damages if an employee’s injury or death resulted, in whole or in part, from the negligence of the railroad’s officers, agents, or other employees. Liability also extends to injuries caused by defects or insufficiencies, due to negligence, in the railroad’s equipment, such as cars, engines, track, or machinery. The statute also clarifies that an employee whose duties contribute to or substantially affect interstate or foreign commerce is covered, ensuring a broad scope of protection for railroad workers. In cases of death, the claim can be brought by the employee’s personal representative for the benefit of surviving family members, prioritizing spouses and children, then parents, and then dependent next of kin.
Purpose of 45 U.S.C. § 51
The legislative intent behind this particular statute was to address the extremely hazardous nature of railroad work at the turn of the 20th century. Before the enactment of FELA in 1908, railroad workers injured on the job faced significant legal hurdles under traditional state common law. These hurdles often included doctrines such as contributory negligence, the assumption of risk, and the “fellow servant rule,” which frequently barred injured employees from recovering damages, even when their injuries were due to the railroad’s fault.
This federal law was created to rectify these injustices by establishing a more favorable and uniform standard of liability for railroad companies. Its primary goal is to promote safety in the railroad industry and provide a more effective means of recovery for injured railroad employees and their families. Unlike state workers’ compensation systems, which are typically “no-fault” and offer limited benefits, FELA is a fault-based system designed to allow workers to recover full damages by proving the railroad’s negligence, thereby incentivizing railroads to maintain safer working conditions.
Real-World Example of 45 U.S.C. § 51
Imagine John, a railroad engineer for a major freight carrier operating across state lines, is performing his duties in a busy rail yard. While conducting a routine inspection of an engine, he attempts to access a specific component. Due to inadequate lighting in the inspection pit, combined with a grease spill that had not been cleaned from the walkway for several days (despite previous complaints from other employees), John slips, falls, and suffers a severe back injury.
Under 45 U.S.C. § 51, John could file a lawsuit against the railroad company. He would allege that his injury resulted, at least in part, from the railroad’s negligence. Specifically, he might argue that the railroad was negligent in failing to provide adequate lighting in the workplace, failing to maintain a safe work environment by not cleaning up the grease spill, and failing to respond to prior complaints about the hazardous conditions. Even if John himself was considered partially negligent for not being more careful, FELA’s rules on comparative negligence would reduce his damages proportionally rather than completely barring his claim. This scenario demonstrates how the statute provides a mechanism for injured railroad employees to seek compensation when their employer’s negligence contributes to their harm.
Related Statutes
Several other federal statutes are closely related to or frequently invoked alongside 45 U.S.C. § 51 in personal injury litigation involving railroad workers:
- 45 U.S.C. § 53 – Comparative Negligence: This section modifies the common law rule of contributory negligence. It states that an injured employee’s damages will be diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to them, rather than being completely barred from recovery.
- 45 U.S.C. § 54 – Assumption of Risk Abolished: This provision eliminates the defense of assumption of risk for railroads, meaning an employee cannot be deemed to have assumed the risks of their employment, even if they were aware of a hazard.
- 45 U.S.C. § 55 – Contract Exempting From Liability Void: This section invalidates any contract, rule, regulation, or device that attempts to exempt a railroad common carrier from liability under FELA.
- 49 U.S.C. Chapter 203 – Safety Appliance Act (SAA): This Act requires railroads to equip trains with specific safety appliances, such as automatic couplers, power brakes, and grab irons. A violation of the SAA that contributes to an injury automatically establishes railroad negligence under FELA, negating the need for the employee to prove fault.
- 49 U.S.C. Chapter 207 – Boiler Inspection Act (BIA): The BIA mandates that all parts and appurtenances of locomotives and tenders be in proper condition and safe to operate without unnecessary peril. Similar to the SAA, a violation of the BIA that causes or contributes to an injury constitutes negligence per se under FELA.
Case Law Interpreting 45 U.S.C. § 51
This particular statute has been subject to extensive judicial interpretation over the decades, shaping its application in personal injury claims. Below are examples of significant cases that have helped define key aspects of FELA:
- Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co.: This landmark 1957 Supreme Court case clarified the standard of causation under FELA, establishing that an employer’s negligence need only play “any part, however small,” in causing the injury or death. This is a significantly lower causation threshold than “proximate cause” in typical common law negligence cases.
- Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Gottshall: In this 1994 case, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the compensability of purely emotional injuries under FELA. It held that damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress are recoverable, but only if the employee satisfies the “zone of danger” test, meaning they were placed in immediate risk of physical harm by the railroad’s negligence.
These cases, among many others, demonstrate the judiciary’s ongoing role in defining the scope of FELA’s protection for railroad workers and the standards for establishing railroad liability.
Why 45 U.S.C. § 51 Matters in Personal Injury Litigation
The existence of 45 U.S.C. § 51 is profoundly significant in personal injury litigation, particularly for injured railroad workers. Unlike most private sector employees who are covered by state-specific workers’ compensation systems, railroad employees are instead covered by FELA. This distinction is critical because FELA operates very differently:
First, FELA requires proof of employer negligence, even if that negligence is minimal (the “in whole or in part” standard). This is in contrast to “no-fault” workers’ compensation systems, which provide benefits regardless of who was at fault but often limit the types and amounts of damages. Under FELA, a plaintiff can recover for a broader range of damages, including pain and suffering, lost earning capacity, and emotional distress, which are typically not fully available under workers’ compensation.
Second, FELA significantly alters traditional common law defenses that typically favor employers. It completely abolishes the defense of assumption of risk and replaces contributory negligence with a system of comparative negligence. This means an injured railroad worker is not barred from recovery even if they were partly at fault; their damages are simply reduced by their percentage of fault. This makes it considerably easier for injured workers to secure compensation.
For Texas personal injury attorneys, understanding FELA is crucial when representing railroad clients. These cases are federal matters, often involving complex federal regulations (like the SAA and BIA), and they demand specialized knowledge beyond typical state personal injury law. The ability to pursue claims in court with a jury, without caps on damages, and with a lower burden of proof for causation, provides a powerful avenue for justice for injured railroad employees and their families, making FELA an indispensable piece of legislation in this specific area of personal injury law.