Family of woman suing Tex-Mex Railway

[zardoz]

Christopher Maher, Alice Echo-News Journal

The family of a woman who was struck by a train while walking on the tracks in Alice in September filed a lawsuit Friday against the Texas Mexican Railway Company claiming the company's negligence led to the woman's death.

The suit was filed in the 79th District Court by Jose Franco, Antonio Franco, Danny Franco, Juan Franco and Dalia Ortiz, on behalf of the estate of Emma Franco. In addition to the Texas Mexican Railway Company, Mexrail Inc., Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Abraham Solis and William Paul Barker are all named as defendants in the suit.

According to court documents, Watson was struck by a train on Sept. 27, 2005 on which Solis and Barker were the conductor and engineer.

The suit claims the defendants were negligent in "not providing warning or sufficient warning" to Franco before she was struck.

The plaintiffs seek through the suit damages including those related to physical pain, mental anguish, loss of earning capacity and funeral and burial expenses.

According to a police report of the incident, witnesses told police that they had observed Franco walking on the tracks heading west and had heard and seen the train apply the emergency brakes and blow the horn to get her to move off the tracks. The report also included statements from Solis and Barker in which they reportedly told police they saw Franco try to move off the track just as the train hit her on her left side. The report stated the engineer observed Franco holding a container and police found a beer can lying in the area of impact. An autopsy conducted by the Corpus Christi Medical Examiner later revealed Franco's blood-alcohol level was at .1, just above the legal limit of .08.

http://www.aliceechonews.com/articles/2006/06/06/local_news/news02.txt

I know this type of situation is old news to us on the forum, but sometimes I just can't get over the absurdity of some of these claims. I sincerrly hope the train crew counter-sues those morons for the stress they are about to be put through. The train crew is going to prove themselves innocent.

[Anonymous]

Anytime you here of an accident of this nature where a train is involved it is always the same... "It was the railroad's fault" [:(!]

[pmsteamman]

Just stop running all the trains.... no more accidents,derailments,maintence costs go down,etc,etc.

[sgtbean1]

Suing the railroad for negligance.... yeah, negligance of personal responsibility. There's ample signs and warnings to keep you off the tracks, not to mention the actions normally undertaken by the traincrews to at least try everything in their power to avoid an accident. I don't care how much alcohol she had; that doesn't rid you of personal responsibility.

If I were one of the train's crew, I'd drag THEM into court for damages. These folks are just passengers on their own train in a case like this; they can't stop on a dime, however much they wi***hey could.

My thoughts go out to the family for their loss, but their lawsuit is a farce.
Just my 2 cents...

[chad thomas]

Walking down the tracks drinking a beer with a BAC of .1 and it's the railroads fault? Just one more step in the decline and fall of western civilization.[:(]

I don't know what's worse, the idiots that file these frivelous suits or the legal system that allows them. Then there are the RR lawers that so often settle out of court that encourage this kind of thing. You know what they all need...

[Anonymous]

No matter what you do you cannot protect people from their own stupidity. We seem to live in an age where we do not have to accept any risk for our own actions. It is always someone else's fault. This is particularily true in the litigious world of the US legal system compared to other countries in the world. I say to the family, get a life.

[David_Telesha]

Let's see..

She was criminally trespassing...

She was LEGALLY DRUNK...

Witnesses say the engineer gave audible warning, and applied the brakes...

She got hit and now the family is suing the railroad and crew?

It should NOT work that way... Gotta loved this screwed up legal system.

[Hugh Jampton]

Don't balme the family,, they were more than likely talked into it by some smooth talking lawyer.

[SALfan]

The judge should be able to order the family members and the lawyer who filed the suit to be flogged until they get some sense.

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JOdom

The judge should be able to order the family members and the lawyer who filed the suit to be flogged until they get some sense.

I like this!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by idhull

No matter what you do you cannot protect people from their own stupidity. We seem to live in an age where we do not have to accept any risk for our own actions. It is always someone else's fault. This is particularily true in the litigious world of the US legal system compared to other countries in the world. I say to the family, get a life.

I could not have thought of a better way to say it.

[dekemd]

The easiest way to stop these frivilous lawsuits is to pass a law requiring the plaintiff to pay ALL court costs and legal fees for BOTH sides if they lose.

[SALfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by idhull

No matter what you do you cannot protect people from their own stupidity. We seem to live in an age where we do not have to accept any risk for our own actions. It is always someone else's fault.

Sad but true. However, there is a small upside to the "It's not my fault, I shouldn't suffer the consequences of my actions, the rules are for someone else" attitude so prevalent in this country. That's just job security for the folks in the correctional field, because those attitudes keep the jails and prisons brimming full.

[Anonymous]

Stupid suit, I hope it gets thrown out of court. Anyone can sue anyone, for anything...doesn't mean it is right, doesn't mean it is just, and doesn't mean they will win either. Hopefully, this one won't.

Unfortunately, juries tend to be made up of poor folk just like you and me. And poor folk have this tendancy to resent folk who aren't (poor).

That is where it gets really screwed up. You have these same emotional buffoons getting appointed to juries who invariably are the ones yelling "get a rope" whenever you hear in the news someone accused of a horrible crime, before there is even a trial and proof of guilt.

That same mentality, when appointed to be a member to a jury, starts to feel like a celebrity, feeling like their one time involvement CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE in this ugly old world, so they identify with the non wealthy plaintiff against the perceived greater evil, the deep pockets.

The thinking goes "well, nothing can bring the victim back, but money can sooth the pain of those left behind, "

Someone mentioned: -"requiring the plaintiff to pay ALL court costs and legal fees for BOTH sides if they lose."-


Wonderful in theory, but if such were made into law, it would so easily be exploited by the wealthy, to the point where real victims would be made affraid to seek justice, for fear of losing.

[zardoz]

Anti-
the bad part about it is not only are these dolts sueing the big, mean railroad, they are also naming the train crew, who most likely do not have such deep pockets.

I've posted this before, but I think it bears repeating: I think the railroads should join forces on these frivolous lawsuits, and put their combined $$$ towards lawyers that will utterly destroy these claims WITHOUT settling out-of-court. And the railroads should always counter-sue for expenses incurred by the claim.

Once the shysters in this country realize that the railroads are not going to back down, few of them will wi***o invest the time and money necessary to try to fight such a force.

[exPalaceDog]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton

Don't balme the family,, they were more than likely talked into it by some smooth talking lawyer.

The lawyer may be "smooth talking" but he is NOT dumb. If the case goes to court, it will cost the railroad say $25,000 to pay their lawyers to prepare their defense. Hence, it is cheaper to pay say $10,000 to the lawyer to go away. After the lawyer deducts his fee plus expenses, don't look for the family to see much cash.

Have fun

[Anonymous]

Based on stories like this I wonder if we should start our own reality TV show where at the end of it, we present a Darwin Award. Just my [2c] worth.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

Anti-
the bad part about it is not only are these dolts sueing the big, mean railroad, they are also naming the train crew, who most likely do not have such deep pockets.

Generally when that happens, it is a scare tactic.

In the end, what happens in such cases, (lets just assume for this purpose that the plaintiff wins) The settlement will specify that the monies paid by the railroad to the "victim" fully satisfy the claim, and all parties listed as defendant are released from further liability, yada yada, etc.

It doesn't HAVE to operate that way, but since the plaintiff is usually very anxious to get their hands on some money, they will sign away their rights to collect from someone who has no money anyway, in exchange for (as JG Wentworth puts it) "cash now".. [;)]


I hate to act like such a know it all on this one, but the fact is that MANY MANY moons ago, I was named as a co-defendant in a lawsuit filed against my employer, simply because i was a key witness in their defense.

it is a strategy ploy. Designed to intimidate the defense. BTDT, unfortunately.

[railfanespee4449]

Maybe the RRs should bring back a modified version of the cow catcher
[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[DrummingTrainfan]

I think that if a person is TRESSPASSING on RR property they should be held responsible if they're hit, whether the horn is sounded or not. [sigh] It would be like if someone tresspasses into a mine-field that has plenty of signs and then suing the military because no horns or buzzers went off when they were about to step on that land mine...

[ChrisBARailfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by exPalaceDog

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton

Don't balme the family,, they were more than likely talked into it by some smooth talking lawyer.

The lawyer may be "smooth talking" but he is NOT dumb. If the case goes to court, it will cost the railroad say $25,000 to pay their lawyers to prepare their defense. Hence, it is cheaper to pay say $10,000 to the lawyer to go away. After the lawyer deducts his fee plus expenses, don't look for the family to see much cash.

Have fun

That is really true. I had a close family involved in a serious car accident with a truck that involved criminal neglience and a civil trial, the trial awarded my family member $55,000 and by the time the two lawyers teams and an expert who never testified claims were settled my family member got just enough to cover the rehab expenses he occured. He got nothing for pain, lost work, etc.....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by DrummingTrainfan

I think that if a person is TRESSPASSING on RR property they should be held responsible if they're hit, whether the horn is sounded or not. [sigh] It would be like if someone tresspasses into a mine-field that has plenty of signs and then suing the military because no horns or buzzers went off when they were about to step on that land mine...

FWIW, I couldn't agree with you more.

Seems pretty cut and dried to me, we aren't supposed to be there (on the tracks) but when we go there anyway, we (should) adopt the ultimate responsibility for our own well being. After all, it is our decision to be there, just as it should be our decision to leave.

The fact that some people seem to think they have the right to go there, and make it someone else's fault for anything that goes wrong, just seems absurd to me.

But, absurd is the way of the world, more often than not.

SO often in these cases, the fact of any actual wrong doing is immaterial.

All that matters is the attorney's ability to convince 12 morons that someone has suffered.

I've got some friends that still believe that "reality TV" is not scripted. So what can you expect?

[Poppa_Zit]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

QUOTE: Originally posted by DrummingTrainfan

I think that if a person is TRESSPASSING on RR property they should be held responsible if they're hit, whether the horn is sounded or not. [sigh] It would be like if someone tresspasses into a mine-field that has plenty of signs and then suing the military because no horns or buzzers went off when they were about to step on that land mine...

FWIW, I couldn't agree with you more.

Seems pretty cut and dried to me, we aren't supposed to be there (on the tracks) but when we go there anyway, we (should) adopt the ultimate responsibility for our own well being. After all, it is our decision to be there, just as it should be our decision to leave.

The fact that some people seem to think they have the right to go there, and make it someone else's fault for anything that goes wrong, just seems absurd to me.

But, absurd is the way of the world, more often than not.

SO often in these cases, the fact of any actual wrong doing is immaterial.

All that matters is the attorney's ability to convince 12 morons that someone has suffered.

I've got some friends that still believe that "reality TV" is not scripted. So what can you expect?

Once again, I shall weigh in on this by espousing my standard reply to these capricious and supercilious actions:

These shenanigans are why Richard III Duke of York said what he said to John Cade in Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 2.

[Train 284]

Idiots! People will do anything for a dollar! I really hate people like that! Stop trespassing on private poperty and use some common sense! Geez!

[Tim Burton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chinatown782411

Anytime you here of an accident of this nature where a train is involved it is always the same... "It was the railroad's fault" [:(!]

I blame Darwin! They need to sue him too!

[Anonymous]

There are groups out there working for legal reform, but it's long and slow, the types of things people sue for...such as being zapped by lightning on a roof (building owner should have put warnings about it, they say). As for the railroad incident...it's like this, if someone was able to wander into a factory, and walk through the floors, mingle among the machinery...is the factory at fault? ISn't there something called "common sense"? I thought that once people had grown enough they learnt these things....ok, maybe we're being too optimistic. Would you take a stroll on an Interstate if it seemed "quiet"? Apparntly, some people would!

~Ra'akone

[Anonymous]

Never overlook the potential stupidity of 12 "get a rope" zealots in the hands of a skilled solicitor.

They will prosecute their interpretation of what constitutes "evil" everytime, and feel good about doing it.

[sigma693]

If someone were drinking and wandering on a highway would the jury think all the drivers that hit them were at fault? I think the RR's should counter-sue for malicious prosecution...

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by sigma693

If someone were drinking and wandering on a highway would the jury think all the drivers that hit them were at fault? I think the RR's should counter-sue for malicious prosecution...

Depends upon situational factors, and the spin put on the story.


If the driver that hit them had a history of running down pedestrians, and a smug attitude hostile to anyone who'd DARE get in his way, then i think a skillful lawyer could manipulate 12 'good ol boys' to the point they were boo hoo hooing in their hankies.

"spin" is everything.

[caldreamer]

The judge should make the family pay the railroad for the following costs after blasting the family for bringing a frivelous law suit.
Court costs
Attorney fees
Deposition costs
Pay for all employees while dealing with the suit,
All travel expences
Making the family pay thousands of dollars will discourage this kind of law suit.