Troutman Pepper represented Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NS) as lead trial counsel in defense of a federal antitrust lawsuit brought against NS by CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSX). NS and CSX are the only two Class I railroads in the eastern United States and are rivals across their rail networks.
The litigation represented a major effort by CSX to use the antitrust laws to gain better access to what CSX claimed was a “critical marine terminal” in Hampton Roads, VA, used for the import/export of goods using intermodal containers. CSX claimed that access to the terminal is “essential to its business.” NS has direct rail access to the terminal, which CSX does not, and has to use the facilities of a small line railroad and NS’s tracks. CSX claimed it was being precluded from economically viable access by high charges for that indirect access. NS took the position that it has legitimate advantages because it owns the rail lines giving access to the terminal and that CSX was trying to use the antitrust laws to overcome those legitimate advantages.
CSX originally filed suit in 2018 and the case was set for a jury trial in early 2023 after full discovery and COVID-related delays. However, shortly before the trial date, the trial court (Eastern District of Virginia) dismissed all of CSX’s claims in a series of orders. One major prong of the rulings was a decision on Jan. 27, 2023, on an issue of first impression, that injunctive relief was not available against a railroad under the antitrust laws. Another key prong was ruling that the statutes of limitations barred CSX’s damages claims. The case is currently on appeal, and Troutman Pepper is counsel on the appeal.
The case is significant to the parties, given the importance CSX assigns to its litigation objectives. It is also significant to NS given the amounts of damages (which could be trebled) that CSX sought. The court rulings broke new ground on whether injunctive relief is available against a railroad, and the statute of limitations rulings, while not breaking new ground, represented a principled and well-described application of existing law to the facts of the case.
The team on this matter is led by Alan D. Wingfield and includes Michael E. Lacey, Massie P. Cooper, Kathleen M. Hutchenreuther, Jana K. Stone, John C. Lynch, Megan E. Burns, Kimberly D. Eason, Shannon V. Patterson, Daniel N. Anziska, Carolyn A. Smith and Alicia M. Rountree.