The lawsuit claims damage to the track and a locomotive exceeding $75,000.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Albuquerque on November 3 — two days after 53-year-old Robert Valencia of Albuquerque and 55-year-old Carol Duran of Edgewood were killed.
Valencia was driving a pickup truck and Duran was driving a dump truck.
The lawsuit says Valencia parked close to the tracks near where they cross a dirt road and Duran parked on the tracks at the crossing.
The lawsuit alleges Valencia had told Duran to stop her vehicle on the tracks so he could talk to her and neither moved despite warnings from the train’s horn.
(This item was distributed Nov. 15, 2006, by The Associated Press.)
These 2 need to be nominated for Darwin Awards Candidates.
With all the reports we hear from time to time about IDIOTS who do something dumb, get hit by a traian and then win a major lawsuit agaisnt the railroad it really makes me feel good to see the railroad suing IDIOTS for damage they created.
Certainly some bleeding hearts are going to feel sorry for the 2 dolts who are now taking the dirt nap due to their own stupidity but there always are, I hope the railroad wins this suit.
Frankly I wish the next time some fool sues a railroad for injury resulting from theri own stupid actions, teh judge throws out the suit, fines the individual for the cost of court time, puts the lawyer in prison for 6 months for being a public nuisance and then countersues the individual a huge sum of money to compensate teh train crew for emotional suffering. It's time to quit being tolerant of fools and start to have sanity and self responsibility encouraged in this society once again.
Un believable
(I'm off my soap box now)
slotracer wrote:These 2 need to be nominated for Darwin Awards Candidates. With all the reports we hear from time to time about IDIOTS who do something dumb, get hit by a traian and then win a major lawsuit agaisnt the railroad it really makes me feel good to see the railroad suing IDIOTS for damage they created. Certainly some bleeding hearts are going to feel sorry for the 2 dolts who are now taking the dirt nap due to their own stupidity but there always are, I hope the railroad wins this suit. Frankly I wish the next time some fool sues a railroad for injury resulting from theri own stupid actions, teh judge throws out the suit, fines the individual for the cost of court time, puts the lawyer in prison for 6 months for being a public nuisance and then countersues the individual a huge sum of money to compensate teh train crew for emotional suffering. It's time to quit being tolerant of fools and start to have sanity and self responsibility encouraged in this society once again. Un believable (I'm off my soap box now)
Your friendly neighborhood CNW fan.
How do they know that he told her to park there? Who squealed?
I hope BNSF wins this, and everyone else hears about it.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
CShaveRR wrote: I hope BNSF wins this, and everyone else hears about it.
An "expensive model collector"
JSGreen wrote: CShaveRR wrote: I hope BNSF wins this, and everyone else hears about it. Which is probably the reason they filed the suit. $75,000 may be less than the litigition costs, given how those things seem to work. And, I wouldnt expect they really believe they can prevail. But it might save them that much in the long run, if it only prevents ONE incident like it, because someone remembered the incident. Not a great public relations move (great big railroad vs recent widows...)Of course, being able to attribure any decrease in grade crossing inciden the lawsuitts will be next to impossible...unless they drop off to nothing in that same area! It might start a trend...
The article states that one vehicle was a dump truck. I guess it was owned by a business. Most businesses have sufficient insurance coverage. I wonder why that company did not just settle with BNSF, because they certainly will incur high legal costs to defend their insured.
The fact that a lawsuit has been filed does not preclude settlement. The attorneys from both sides begin negotiating even after the defendant has been served, and the filing may be part of the negotiations. The trick is that by settling, the defendant LaFarge North American Inc. admits liability. That may be why the prayer (amount asked) is minimal, and may be intended to ease a settlement.
I'd sure like to see the file on this case.
I certainly would like to see more cases where the railroad does file a suit against trespassers that cause damage.
The case in the northeaset where Amtrak has to pay the two skateboarders is a prime example of where the railroad should have jumped on the bandwagon right away. They should have had the trespassers arrested and the family charged with the costs of the investigation, temporary shutting down of the line, inspection of the catenary, etc.,.
Unfortunately the urban areas in the U.S seem to be replete with bleeding heart judges that won't take a stand against the idiocy. Interesting to note that a number of these judges were "flower power" and/or radical hippies back in the 60s and 70s (yes, I was around then). One judge here in Tampa fits in that category. A "wrist slapper" that criminal lawyers probably love.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
$75,000 is the amount named in the law suit because $75,000 is the jurisdictional amount to file suit in Federal District Court. Plaintiffs filing in federal court based on diversity almost never list the actual amount of damages. The actual damages are likely much higher.
My guess is that the railroad is claiming that there was an intentional action (does sound like a murder/suicide or dual suicide), but I seriously doubt that the employer is going to settle (since in order to be liable for an employee's action, the injury must have arrived out of the course of employment and not out of what is called a frolic and detour). Thus, the employer likely has a much stronger legal defense than do the estates of the people who parked on the tracks and didn't move when there was a warning horn.
I wouldn't expect a big trend in railroads filing suits - the fact that there was an employer and the apparent intentional nature of the injury makes it more likely to collect - because damage to the railroad is a foreseeable consenquence of the action of parking on the railroad tracks it will be an actionable action. In most trespasser cases, there wouldn't be the same amount of foreseeable damage from an intentional act by a trespasser (excempting something obviously damaging like a trespasser tampering with a switch). I'd guess that the railroad is only filing suit because they can bring an intentional tort action. In most grade crossing cases, for example, the decedent is likely to have been merely negligent rather than acting wantonly.
You can, but its harder to prove - and since most states use comparative negligence systems, the relative negligence of the parties will be measured and taken into account by the jury. Its hard to imagine a jury granting damages to the railroad in such a negligence case - plus, the public relations would be a disaster and the additional litigation costs of a counterclaim would likely outweigh any gains to a railroad. Plus, unless the collision is with a commercial truck, the railroad may not be able to collect on a judgment against an individual. A lot of litigation is strategizing. Most companies want to avoid litigation unless there are clear benefits - here with some deranged people intentionally causing a train wreck, makes it a much stronger case.
penncentral2002 wrote:You can, but its harder to prove - and since most states use comparative negligence systems, the relative negligence of the parties will be measured and taken into account by the jury. Its hard to imagine a jury granting damages to the railroad in such a negligence case - plus, the public relations would be a disaster and the additional litigation costs of a counterclaim would likely outweigh any gains to a railroad. Plus, unless the collision is with a commercial truck, the railroad may not be able to collect on a judgment against an individual. A lot of litigation is strategizing. Most companies want to avoid litigation unless there are clear benefits - here with some deranged people intentionally causing a train wreck, makes it a much stronger case.
Personally, I doubt that people who are willing to risk death to save a few minutes are going to be deterred by the possibility of paying damages or their families paying damages. Hence, there would be little additional deterrent effect for the average crossing accident. Now, it might deter people from intentionally causing train wrecks by parking their vehicles on railroad tracks like in this case (and in the case in the Los Angeles area where the guy parked on the commuter rail tracks and left his car causing a train wreck which killed several people - of course, he got charged with capital murder in that case so that is effectively the same deterrent (death)). And since the intentional actions are the more dangerous actions, that is where you want to deter people - saying go commit suicide some other way in effect! Of course, its very hard to deter people who are trying to die - but even suicidal people often do think of their families (and in fact, might be trying to make the death look like an accident so their life insurance companies will pay) so the goal of this lawsuit might be to deter suicide by train.
Besides, one of the first things they teach you in law school is to not sue broke people So realistically, the deterrent effect in the average person trying to beat a train case, would only go towards commercial truck drivers whose employers would have adequate insurance to go after to pay for damages to the railroad. Not sure if locomotives have video recording devices so that they can videotape vehicles trying to beat them at crossing accidents, but imagine the deterrent effect if commercial truck drivers knew that if they were caught successfully beating trains they would get fired (in addition to the normal deterrent effect of death if you fail to successfully beat trains)!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.