BOSTON - A man who suffered severe burns from grabbing the overhead wire at Boston's South Station two years ago is suing the passenger railroad because Amtrak didn't do enough to protect trespassers, the New York Post reported. After a night of drinking in July 2006, 25-year-old Brian Hopkins went to South Station at 2 a.m. after telling friends that he "wanted to get back to New York." He tried to force his way inside an Acela train and then climbed on top of the train where he was burned by the overhead wires. He suffered third-degree burns over 85 percent of his body, and doctors have since amputated his left hand and leg. In the suit, his family claims that Amtrak "should have known that persons trespassed" in the South Station area, cut off the electricity going to the overhead wires, and parked its trains somewhere else when they weren't in use.
gradyo54 wrote:T... I hope some Judge tells this moron to shove off, Suing Amtrak for His being a drunken idiot, but some jury will give this guy a million bucks!!! ....family sued, and You guessed it some jury gave them a million bucks!! Only in America!!!!
The reason uncountable instances like these awards happen "Only in America" is because we the presumed "non-morons" have let this happen. Jury duty is a high office, if you know your rights as a juror. You are the highest power in that court, not the judge or anyone else! (Need a refresher or a lesson just PM me and I'll direct you to the info of jury power)
We all let the so-called "morons" do the duty and this is what happens. What do you expect? Even if one or two presumed "non-morons" were on the jury, we still need more since most Civil cases need only 9 of 12 for a verdict. If everyone would realize that we, the presumed "non-moron" people, can stop this nonsense even when a judge, who knows there is no legitimate cause of action, won't. Unfortunately, it takes more than one or two wise or "non-moron " jurors to stop the ridiculous awards.
The remedy is not that bad, try to get on the juries. What's the big deal, you give up a few phone calls to the automated line and possible a morning at the court; not picked, then you are done! Or you can volunteer. When that happens in sufficient numbers, these outrageous for awards will stop!
mp
Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on.
First, the sentence that frequently results in having to choose a new forum name: I am a trial lawyer. I represent plaintiffs. I sue negligent folk for their negligent acts and I profit from doing same. That said - there are an awful lot of totally bogus claims out there, and people get paid. Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries.
The next time you get called up - go! Don't ask to be excused. Better yet - volunteer! If real people sat on juries then only real injuries would be compensated and only in real numbers.
And no, I wouldn't sue Amtrak in this case. And yes, I turn down bogus cases. In fact I turned to this thread just after reviewing a file and deciding to turn the client down.
Your mileage may vary.
Hear, hear! Good comment, mphill66.
If we abdicate all of the jury duty to the sort of people who think that this guy DESERVES a pile of money for his behavior, then we can reasonably expect to see such crazy verdicts.
mphill66 nailed it.
The only award this moron should have received would be a Darwin award. Unfortunately, he missed out on that.
Rigby wrote:Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on. .....Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries.
Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on. .....Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries.
Actually, I have and that's why I know you need more than one or 2 because of the 9-3 rule here. If you knew (you likely do) what really goes on, you know why even your perfect defense will lose.. because the bottom line is "hey it's time to go home let's just give him the money , who cares" Try dealing with that, as an example...
mphill66 wrote: Rigby wrote: Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on. .....Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries. Actually, I have and that's why I know you need more than one or 2 because of the 9-3 rule here. If you knew (you likely do) what really goes on, you know why even your perfect defense will lose.. because the bottom line is "hey it's time to go home let's just give him the money , who cares" Try dealing with that, as an example...
Rigby wrote: Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on. .....Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries.
Sadly the "who cares" attitude that has a lot to do with many of the problems in this country.
Dan
So Amtrak didn't do enough to protect trespassers? Um, protecting criminal activity? What does he want? A fence around the top of the train? Armed guards at double arm length around the train 24/7? It says he'd been out drinking, where were his friends? Why did they let him go alone to the station? Or did they just stand by and watch? Did he have a history of being a danger to himself when he drinks alcohol?
I'm not surprised he wants to sue. It's not really the railroad's fault, it's just the venue he chose. I remember reading many years ago in a "Dear Abby" about a lady who wanted to protect he private swimming pool but kids kept breaking into her yard no matter how many signs and fences and locks and security measures she went through and she was advised that if someone gets hurt on her property they could sue her. Her pool was called an attractive nuisence and that she should either have it removed or open it to the public or something stupid like that.
I don't remember what Abby's solution was but the situation seemed futile when I read I read it. It was alluded in the article it's the same situation when a person owns an apple orchard and if someone picks an apple on the property, while trespassing, and gets hurt, it's somehow the property owner's fault.
The point I'm trying to make is these case are not without presedense. And like the others before me, if a jury trial is selected use the power of the people to change the presedence from rewarding stupidity with an outrageous award to getting what they deserve. If the Supreme Court is allowed find laws unconstitutional then a jury should be able to have power to make some change at the lower level.
Only in America do we have so much freedom to bring so much garbage* to court with so much ease and freedom, but only in America do we have so much more Power of the People.
yad sdrawkcab s'ti
MP - sorry to be unclear. From your post I'd have assumed you were willing to serve. I should have said "generally, right thinking folk..." I certainly did not mean to malign you.
You're right about needing more than one in a civil case, however.
mphill66 wrote: Rigby wrote:Yes, yes, yes! Mphill is right on. .....Why? Because right thinking folk like you and me don't sit on juries. Actually, I have and that's why I know you need more than one or 2 because of the 9-3 rule here. If you knew (you likely do) what really goes on, you know why even your perfect defense will lose.. because the bottom line is "hey it's time to go home let's just give him the money , who cares" Try dealing with that, as an example...
I think we've become a society where we're no longer responsible for our own actions.
Years ago, parental groups got on the TV industry to protect kids from violence and other unwanted stuff on TV. Topics like the V-chip, parental control, etc. began showing up. When I was a kid, if my parents didn't want me watching something, the channel got changed, or the TV got turned off. If that didn't work, the antenna was unplugged. Problem solved.
Over the past few years, cell phone drivers have become commonplace, and I've lost track how many times I've been cut off in traffic by them. If I hit my horn, they give me the finger. Apparently their phone call is so important that they are no longer responsible for engaging their brains in something that requires their hands and feet.
Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.