Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
NY Times Article on Amtrak Indemnification
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by jeaton</i> <br /><br />LC <br /> <br />OK, I'll stand corrected. <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />J- <br /> <br />Thanks. This rule can be really harsh. Years ago, in a case before the California Supreme Court (I wore the black hat) I represented an insurance company that was seeking refusing to cover a case of child sexual molestation by a well known business man of a very young girl. The girl and her mother sought damages for the molestation and sued the molester. The insurance company refused to cover him based upon the theory that sexual molestation was always intentional. As discussed above, intentional acts by an insured can never be covered by insurance. Suffice it to say that despite several appeals by the plaintiff, the courts sustained the insurance company's position. Sometimes the law doesn't work justice, it is merely a choice. <br /> <br />So it is also with things like railroad indemnification. A choice was made at the formation of Amtrak to run the indemnification in a certain way as a quid pro quo for Amtrak gaining access to the freight railroads trackage. <br /> <br />LC <br /> <br />
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy