Anthony Nicastro is a trial attorney with extensive litigation experience in the areas of transportation defense for railroads, trucking companies and criminal law. He also advises and represents clients involved in construction defect matters, land use issues, insurance coverage, employment law, landlord tenant disputes, wills and trusts and family law.
Anthony began his legal career in 2005 as an Assistant District attorney in Augusta, Georgia prosecuting major felony crimes including Murder, Rape, Armed Robbery, Child Molestation and Drug Trafficking. He then moved to Denver, Colorado where he transitioned his law practice to civil law defending railroads in lawsuits filed under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), crossing accidents, high exposure accident cases, land rights and employment law disputes. He represented Class 1 railroads and short line railroads.
In 2015 Anthony and his family moved to Billings, Montana to meet the growing demands of his clients for experienced and professional trial lawyers in Montana. He was part of a select group of Montana counsel who successfully challenged the Montana jurisdictional laws that allowed plaintiffs to sue companies in Montana over disputes that had no connection to Montana. In 2016 the United States’ Supreme Court ruled that Montana’s general jurisdiction law violated the Due Process Rights of these companies. Following this landmark decision trial judges in Yellowstone County reversed and granted more than a dozen motions to dismiss filed by Anthony and his team.
Anthony continues to represent railroads in FELA matters and employment law disputes in the Rocky Mountain Region. His practice has grown to include representing clients in land disputes, property damage issues, contract disputes, family law, wills and trusts and land-lord tenant disputes.
When he is not practicing law, he enjoys spending time with his family and exploring Montana.
BNSF Ry. v. TKDA, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52148 (2017) – Chief United States District Judge for the Montana Division rules in favor of BNSF finding that its contract with TKDA contained a valid indemnification clause. The Court ruled that the contract’s indemnification provision did not violate Montana law when it stated that TKDA assumed and agreed to indemnify BNSF for all losses even the losses occurred due to the negligence of the railroad or its employees. An important ruling in which the Court also outlined differences between an indemnification agreement and an exculpatory clause under Montana law.
BNSF Ry. v. Tyrrell, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017) – United States’ Supreme Court decision holding that BNSF’s Montana business activity does not suffice to permit the assertion of general jurisdiction over claims made by plaintiffs that are unrelated to any activity occurring in Montana.
Bunk vs. BNSF, 2014 Colo. LEXIS 446 – Colorado Supreme Court affirming defense verdict in favor of BNSF.
Mundt vs. BNSF, 2015 Colo. App. LEXIS 454 – Colorado Court of Appeals reversing trial court’s order granting a new trial on the issue of apportionment for preexisting condition. The Court of Appeals reversed and instructed the trial court to reinstate a finding by the jury that 75% of Plaintiff’s medical condition was due to a preexisting condition.
Brecht vs. BNSF, Montana District Court issues summary judgment in favor of BNSF. Plaintiff claimed specific and cumulative trauma injuries while working as a track inspector. The Court ruled that Plaintiff failed to timely file his FELA claim citing that Plaintiff knew or should have known more than three years from the date of filing the complaint that the medical conditions he was alleging were work related.
401 North 31st Street, Suite 770
Billings, Montana 59101