BNSF Railway Company v. Albany & Eastern Railroad Company

Filing 174

Judgment. Signed on 06/02/11 by Judge Anna J. Brown. (bb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY, a Delaware
corporation,

CV No.: 3:08-CV-415-BR
JUDGMENT

Plaintiff-Counterdefendant,
vs.
ALBANY & EASTERN RAILROAD
COMPANY, an Oregon corporation, and
MICHAEL R. ROOT, an individual,
Defendants-Counterclaimants.

This action came on for trial before an eight-person jury, The Honorable Anna J. Brown,
District Judge, presiding on May 16, 17, 18 and 19,201 I. PlaintiffBNSF Railway Company
was represented by Timothy R. Thornton and David P. Morrison. Defendants Albany & Eastern
Railroad Company and Michael R. Root were represented by William N. Mehlhaf and Stacy R.
Owen.

Page 1 - JUDGMENT

Prior to trial, the Court, on its own motion, bifurcated plaintiffs Second Claim for
Misrepresentation/Piercing the Corporate Veil against defendant Michael R. Root for a separate
trial.
Each party made opening statements, called witnesses and introduced evidence in support
of their respective positions, rested and made closing arguments.
The jury was instructed and provided with a special verdict form. To the question "[D]id
PlaintiffBNSF prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant AERC breached
paragraph 2(c) of the [April 3, 1998] Agreement [for Sale ofCeltain Assets, Rights and
Obligations] by failing to compensate BNSF for each loaded rail car AERC interchanged with
Union Pacific at Albany, Oregon?" the jury unanimously answered "No." The jury's special
verdict was entered on May 19,2011.
NOW, THEREFORE, JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED in favor of defendant
Albany & Eastern Railway Company and against plaintiff upon plaintiffs First Claim for Breach
of Contract, which is dismissed with prejudice on its merits.
JUDGMENT IS FURTHER ENTERED in favor of defendant Michael R. Root and
against plaintiff upon plaintiffs Second Claim for MisrepresentationlPiercing the Corporate
Veil, which is dismissed with prejudice, on the basis that it is rendered moot following the jury's
verdict on plaintiffs First Claim.
DATED this t-H'/\'''day of June, 2011.

Page 2 - JUDGMENT

Submitted by:
MARKOWITZ, HERBOLD, GLADE &
MEHLHAF,PC

By:

lsi William N. lvfehlhaJ
William N. Mehlhaf, OSB #752555
Stacy R. Owen, OSB #074826
[phone]
Of Attorneys for Defendants

ROOTBUl255752

Page 3 - JUDGMENT