Nichole S. Bogen

Nichole grew up in Nebraska and attended college in Chicago and Israel.  She and her husband, Mark, returned to Lincoln to raise their kids.  Her experience working for insurance companies and small businesses prior to going to law school gave her an edge in understanding the practical application of the law.  When not working, Nichole may be found hiking with the dogs and spending time with her family.


Education

Lincoln High School, Lincoln, Nebraska
Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, BA International Ministries
University of Nebraska College of Law, JD


Licenses, Admissions & Associations

  • Licensed and admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of Nebraska.
  • Admitted to practice in the federal courts of Iowa, North Dakota, Colorado and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • Member of the National Association of Railroad Trial Counsel and the Nebraska Bar Association.
  • Participating member of the Lincoln Chamber of Commerce and Rise Lincoln.
  • Martindale Hubbell Preeminent Rating.

Experience

Lahart v. BNSF Railway Company, Case No. 4:15-CV-464, 2017 WL 4021132 (S.D. Iowa), affirmed on appeal (8th Cir. November 30, 2018).  The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa granted the railroad summary judgment on the plaintiff’s Federal Employers’ Liability Act claim. He had claimed a shoulder and back injury after operating a switch near Ottumwa, Iowa. The railroad denied the switch was defective and moved to dismiss the claim as not reasonably foreseeable. In granting summary judgment for the railroad, the Court noted that neither the railroad nor plaintiff found any issues with the switch before he operated it.

Mullanix v. BNSF Railway Company, Case No. CI 09-89 (Neb. Dist. Ct. Feb. 14, 2017). The Box Butte County District Court of Nebraska granted partial summary judgment in favor of the railroad on the plaintiff’s claim under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act after excluding plaintiff’s liability expert, Tyler Kress. Kress’s opinions were offered in support of the plaintiff’s claims that his many years of working as an engineer caused him to develop bilateral carpal and cubital tunnel syndrome. Kress generally opined that the plaintiff’s work exposed him to ergonomic risk factors consistent with his injuries, and plaintiff was not warned or trained regarding such risks.

Parker v. Crete Carrier Corporation, In the U.S. District Court of Nebraska, aff’d, 839 F.3d717, (8th Cir.), pet. for rehearing den’d (Nov. 16, 2016). The Court granted the trucking company summary judgment on all of plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff claimed he was discriminated against in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d)(4)(A), by the company requesting him to undergo obstructive sleep apnea (“OSA”) screening due to his body mass index (“BMI”) of greater than 33. He claimed it was a wrongful medical exam and inquiry. He also claimed the company perceived him as disabled in violation of the ADA despite his positive safety record of driving and training for the company.

Odell v. BNSF Railway Company, Case No. CI 12-7872 (Neb. Dist. Ct. LIA Order Feb. 6, 2015; FELA Order Jan. 5, 2016; Dismissal Order Jan. 5, 2016). The Court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the railroad on plaintiff’s Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”), 49 U.S.C. § 20701, claim. Later, the Court denied the railroad’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s Federal Employer’s Liability Act (“FELA”), 45 U.S.C. § 51, claim, however the Court still dismissed plaintiff’s case for failure of prosecution. An appeal is pending.

Doyle v. BNSF Railway Co., In the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska (2015).  The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the railroad and dismissed a retired employee’s negligence and strict liability claims under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”), and his strict liability claims under the Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”), and the Safety Appliance Act (“SAA”).

Morriss v. BNSF Railway Co., In the U.S. District Court of Nebraska (2014), affirmed on appeal, 817 F.3d 1104 (8th Cir. 2016), cert. den’d (Oct. 3, 2016). The Court granted summary judgment for BNSF finding that the railroad did not discriminate against a job applicant in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  The district court dismissed both of the plaintiff applicant’s claims that he was disabled or regarded as disabled by the railroad due to his obesity and BMI. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal holding that obesity is not an impairment unless it is outside of normal range and a result of a physiological condition.

Soule v. BNSF Railway Company, In the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska (2014).  After four days of expert and fact witness testimony, the jury returned a verdict in favor of BNSF on the plaintiff engineer’s Locomotive Inspection Act and Federal Employer’s Liability Act claims.  No appeal was taken.

Ensign v. BNSF Railway Company, In the District Court for Box Butte County, Nebraska (2013). At the close of plaintiff’s case, the judge granted a directed verdict to BNSF due to the failure of the plaintiff to offer evidence to support his claim of negligence under the FELA.

Beaubien v. BNSF Railway Company, In the District Court for Douglas County, Nebraska (2013). The Court granted summary judgment for the railroad finding no evidence of negligence on the part of BNSF or its train crew. The Court dismissed the truck driver’s negligence claim for significant personal injuries he received in a grade crossing collision.

Crawford et al. v. BNSF Railway Company, In the U.S. District Court of Nebraska, affirmed on appeal, 665 F.3d 978 (8th Cir.), and cert. den’d, 133 S.Ct.144 (2012). The Court granted summary judgment to the railroad and dismissed multiple employee claims for sexual harassment, hostile work environment, sex discrimination, and race discrimination. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the railroad exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassing behavior, and the employees failed to timely report the complained of supervisor’s behavior and avail themselves of the railroad’s extensive and comprehensive anti-harassment and anti-discrimination procedures.