Thomas Dluski

Practice Groups:

Casualty/Tort Litigation

Arson, Fraud and First-Party Property Claims

Insurance Coverage

Railroad Litigation

Office Locations:

Peoria, IL

Phone: 309.676.0400

Email Me

News

Firm’s BNSF Team Recognized at BNSF Awards Meeting - 11/10/2016

Heine and Dluski Prevail for BNSF in Train Yard Accident Trial - 07/09/2015

Victories for BNSF Railway - 09/17/2014

Heyl Royster Announces Four New Partners - 01/10/2014

Education

  • Juris Doctor, Valparaiso University School of Law, 2000
  • Bachelor of Science-Accounting, Illinois State University, 1997

Year Joined Firm

2002

 

Find an ATTORNEY

Choose by Alphabet

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Select an Area of Practice

Select an Office

Enter Keyword(s)


Heyl Royster

 

Attorneys

Thomas Dluski (Partner)

PRINT

Tom concentrates his practice in the defense of claims filed under the Federal Employment Liability Act. He provides defense to one of the largest U.S. railway companies in state and federal court in cumulative trauma and specific incident claims.

Tom has primary responsibility for the defense of a number of cases for the firm's major railway company client and takes the lead on factual investigation in Federal Employment Liability Act claims filed against our client. Tom also takes responsibility for drafting and arguing discovery motions, motions to compel and motions for summary judgment. He has taken and defended depositions including those of plaintiffs, fact witnesses, treating physicians and plaintiff's experts.

In addition, Tom has represented insurers in First-Party Property claims involving issues with fire and fraud. He has drafted and argued motions for summary judgment leading to summary judgment for the insurer.

Significant Cases

  • Winkler v. BNSF (2015) Defended BNSF Railway in a FELA jury trial in state court in Galesburg, IL. Plaintiff, who was 47 years old at the time of the incident with four years of service, suffered a broken left rib, lacerated left kidney, and a bruised lung after being struck by a cut of railroad cars while setting handbrakes in the Galesburg train yard in December of 2009. Much of the testimony and evidence at trial centered around how the accident occurred and the applicable rules. Plaintiff alleged that just before the accident he received communication from the Hump Tower Yardmaster that there was a block on Track 19, and that after the accident he was told for the first time that the track was "blocked and rolling," which means that train cars could still be coming down the track. Plaintiff and his expert opined that the use of the term "blocked and rolling" is ambiguous and that a track cannot be blocked and also have cars rolling. Plaintiff also alleged that he had never heard the term until after the incident, although several BNSF witnesses testified that the term was explained during plaintiff's training and on at least two other occasions. Plaintiff also alleged his training was deficient because he was told it was permissible to straddle the rail when setting a handbrake in the bowl, and that he was not familiar with his job responsibilities on the day of the accident. Plaintiff asked the jury for a minimum of $767,000, but received net verdict of $28,000, which reflected the jury's decision to reduce his overall damages by 50% based on the plaintiff's own negligence.
  • Furrow v. BNSF (2014) Represented BNSF Railway Company at trial in case that was brought under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), and tried to a defense verdict in state court in Galesburg, Illinois. In the underlying incident, the plaintiff, a BNSF machine operator, claimed he injured his neck while operating an end-loader to move 20-30 pieces of rail from one side of the tracks to the other. The plaintiff alleged his injury resulted in his undergoing a two-level discectomy and spinal fusion. Plaintiff argued at trial that the operating procedures in place at the time of his injury were improper, and, based on other prior events, BNSF should have known to instruct him to perform the task differently. In defense, BNSF called a biomechanical engineer to refute the way the injury allegedly happened, and presented testimony, including from a former Director of Maintenance for another railroad, that the equipment was safe, appropriate for the task, and consistent with industry practices.

Professional Associations

  • Peoria County Bar Association
  • Illinois State Bar Association
  • Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel 

Court Admissions

  • State Courts of Illinois
  • United States District Court, Central District of Illinois