Skip to main content

Ferrostaal, Inc. v. Union Pacific Railroad

S.D.N.Y.July 5, 2000No. 99 Civ. 10497(AGS)Cited 30 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Schwartz
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiff's action as time-barred under the applicable one-year statute of limitations set forth in UP Exempt Circular 4-D, which plaintiff had agreed to when it elected to ship under the reduced freight rate.

What This Ruling Means

**Ferrostaal, Inc. v. Union Pacific Railroad - Court Ruling Summary** This case involved a shipping dispute between Ferrostaal, Inc. and Union Pacific Railroad Company. Ferrostaal had chosen to ship goods using Union Pacific's reduced freight rate option, which came with special terms and conditions outlined in a document called "UP Exempt Circular 4-D." When problems arose with the shipping arrangement, Ferrostaal waited too long before filing a lawsuit against Union Pacific. The court ruled in favor of Union Pacific Railroad and dismissed Ferrostaal's case entirely. The judge determined that Ferrostaal had missed the deadline to file their lawsuit. When Ferrostaal agreed to use the discounted shipping rate, they also agreed to a one-year time limit for bringing any legal claims. Since they filed their lawsuit after this one-year period had expired, the court said it was too late to proceed. This ruling matters for workers because it shows how important it is to pay attention to deadlines and contract terms. When you agree to special deals or reduced rates, there may be strings attached, including shorter time limits for filing complaints or lawsuits. Workers should always read the fine print and act quickly if they need to file legal claims.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.