By: Ted Schmidt
BNSF Railway Co. v. Buttrick, 624 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 41
(App. Div. I, December 29, 2011) (J. Swan)
ARIZONA COURT LACKS JURISIDICTION TO ISSUE PROTECTIVE
ORDER PROHIBITING EMPLOYER FROM OBTAINING MEDICAL RECORDS OF EMPLOYEE WHO
BROUGHT PERSONAL INJURY ACTION UNDER FELA
Railroad employee sued employer railroad in superior court
for personal injuries pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act
[FELA]. During the pendency of this action the employer asked the
employee to submit medical notices as required under a collective bargaining
agreement [CBA] between the employee’s union and the employer. In
response the employee sought and obtained a protective order from the superior
court attempting to avoid disclosure of the medical records. The employer
then brought this special action and the Arizona Court of Appeals held that the
CBA proceeding is a parallel proceeding under federal law and therefore the
superior court lacked jurisdiction to issue the protective order. Just as the
hearing officer in the CBA would have no jurisdiction to issue orders
controlling the parties’ conduct in the superior court action, the superior
court cannot interfere with the parties’ conduct and rights in the CBA
proceeding.
