Jones

Jones v. Union Pacific Railroad

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 274·2000 Daily Journal DAR 3757·79 Cal. App. 4th 1053·94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 661·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2804
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 11, 2000E025482California5,850 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gaut, J.

1. Introduction

Plaintiffs Charles Ivan Jones and Shirley L. Jones appeal summary judgment entered in favor of defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company. Plaintiffs, whose home is adjacent to Union Pacific’s railroad tracks in Yermo, filed a-nuisance action against Union Pacific for allegedly causing needless train noise and engine fumes. Union Pacific moved for summary judgment or, alternatively, summary adjudication of plaintiffs’ action. The trial court granted Union Pacific’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds plaintiffs’ action is federally preempted by the Surface Transportation Board (STB), Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA), federal Noise Control Act (NCA), and Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), and is barred by Civil Code section 3482 and the federal Constitution’s commerce clause..

Plaintiffs argue on appeal that their action is neither preempted nor barred by the various federal regulations, commerce clause or Civil Code section 3482 because Union Pacific’s conduct is not federally regulated activity. Plaintiffs also argue that state court adjudication of their claim is not barred by the commerce clause because it would not affect…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.