Court rules against railroad that struck Detroit-area teen

[justalurker66]

While the family's expert claimed that the engineer could have stopped the train before hitting Jacob that opinion was not considered by the original court. The judge ruled based on the duty to prevent the accident which is a touchy issue. If it is not determined that the crew had sufficient time and distance to stop the train then the claim that the crew could have stopped is invalid.

[Conrail Quality]

Unbelievably I believe the GTW could still be sued since they're "a company on paper"

Still technically the owner. Some of the MOW trucks say "Operated by Grand Trunk Western" on the cab.

You know I saw a MOW truck in Three Rivers on US131 about a year ago. I was surprised to see GTW on it, was setting beside it at the stop light at Broadway and 131. Also thought it was strange to see it down this way. Is there any 'GTW owned' tracks down this way?

[J T]

Maybe I am old, and missing something, but wasn't the kid trespassing in the first place???

Yes. It's a huge problem in that area with Wyandotte high school being right next to the tracks. City cops will stop people walking along the tracks around there.

It's pretty easy to walk along railroad tracks without being close enough to be hit by a passing train.

[J T]

I find it hard to think a jury would not find someone trespassing while wearing headphones walking between the railroad tracks was substantially more than 50% the cause of his or her injuries.

In this case, the plaintiff should be the one accused of gross negligence, not the defendant.

[M.D.Bentley]

Do STUPID things, GET STUPID prizes! The crew can claim Permanent occupational disability and the carrier can sue for interfering with interstate commerce. And maybe terroristic activities. This will be worth watching, the ambulance chasers will.

[MQT1223]

Unbelievably I believe the GTW could still be sued since they're "a company on paper"

Still technically the owner. Some of the MOW trucks say "Operated by Grand Trunk Western" on the cab.

You know I saw a MOW truck in Three Rivers on US131 about a year ago. I was surprised to see GTW on it, was setting beside it at the stop light at Broadway and 131. Also thought it was strange to see it down this way. Is there any 'GTW owned' tracks down this way?

CN, ex. GT is 10 minutes north of Three Rivers in Schoolcraft.

[J T]

Do STUPID things, GET STUPID prizes! The crew can claim Permanent occupational disability and the carrier can sue for interfering with interstate commerce. And maybe terroristic activities. This will be worth watching, the ambulance chasers will.

Boom! Turn the tables on them.

[justalurker66]

Sure. Big company goes after the family. That is a really good PR move (not).

Don't forget that Jacob died about a month ago. "Sorry for your loss ... but we're going to sue you and call your deceased child a terrorist."

CN needs to defend themselves against the claims being made but otherwise the best case for CN is that people learn from the incident and stay off the tracks.

If the court does rule against CN I hope that it is a narrowly written ruling that focuses on this specific incident and not some broad statement that requires trains to immediately brake the moment the crew determines a trespasser is present.

[Chip]

This is how petty I am. If I were the CEO of CN right now I would order every train to stop at every grade crossing in order to determine there was no traffic "trespassing" over CN tracks, effective immediately. If the legal system wants to be extremely literal then game on.

[DaveO]

At this point, the railroad has not been found guilty.
It was sent back on a technical legal issue.
Don't go overboard, at least not yet.

[GRHC]

This is a no-win situation for everybody. The parents are grieving a lost son. The crew of that train i’m sure feels bad for what happened to that kid and his family they didn’t want to hurt or kill anybody. The railroad has to spend thousands and thousands of dollars on court cost defending themselves for simply running their trains and doing business.

[Chip]

At this point, the railroad has not been found guilty.
It was sent back on a technical legal issue.
Don't go overboard, at least not yet.

Yeah, that's not how I operate

[Conrail Quality]

Still technically the owner. Some of the MOW trucks say "Operated by Grand Trunk Western" on the cab.

You know I saw a MOW truck in Three Rivers on US131 about a year ago. I was surprised to see GTW on it, was setting beside it at the stop light at Broadway and 131. Also thought it was strange to see it down this way. Is there any 'GTW owned' tracks down this way?

CN, ex. GT is 10 minutes north of Three Rivers in Schoolcraft.

I forgot that used to be Grand Trunk.

[chapmaja]

While the family's expert claimed that the engineer could have stopped the train before hitting Jacob that opinion was not considered by the original court. The judge ruled based on the duty to prevent the accident which is a touchy issue. If it is not determined that the crew had sufficient time and distance to stop the train then the claim that the crew could have stopped is invalid.

Again, this is where the entire issue has to be determined.

From reading the reports, and what I do know about the area, the issue of the crew stopping in time is a pretty major aspect of this case, and one that may not go well for the railroad.

Per one of the reports, the train stopped in under 800 feet. This is a long, straight and flat section of track, meaning visibility should be well more than 800 feet. This means the crew had a significant period of visibility of the individual on the tracks before going into emergency.

Again, I don't think the railroad should lose this case if it goes to a jury, but at the same time, if I'm the RR (and entire industry) I don't know that I want this seeing a jury.

[Eric Berger]

Again, I don't think the railroad should lose this case if it goes to a jury, but at the same time, if I'm the RR (and entire industry) I don't know that I want this seeing a jury.

Strongly agreed. The fact that he was trespassing should cancel out any liability on the part of the railroad. The old "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes" comes to mind.

As far as seeing a jury; it's way too much of a roll of the dice on what kind of jury you end up with. You could end up with one who sees this for what it is -- a case of trespassing gone wrong. "We're sorry you got hurt, but that's the gamble you take when you go into an unauthorized area." Or, it could be a bunch of sympathetic, bleeding heart jurors who have an axe to grind with the railroad, and sticks it to them.

I think part of the problem is parents today seem to teach children no respect whatsoever; I was taught, from an early age, to keep your distance because bad things can happen around big machinery. Plus, you can see a whole lot more from a little farther back!

Also, another thing they seem to lack is learning not to take shortcuts. I remember when I was little, the police would come to our school and that was one safety tip they'd always stress, for a variety of reasons.

[PatAzo]

The appellate court opinion. https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/c ... 355-2.html

If it goes to trial the railroad stands a good chance of loosing. That Marion was trespassing would be a defense if they had rounded a curve and there he was 100' away, or he stepped in front of the train and there was no opportunity to stop. The key element is the engineer and conductor allegedly discussing that Marion wasn't hearing the horn and continuing on. It depends on the case the defense mounts. For example the engineer in his career approaches trespassers every week or every day. They always hear the horn and step out of the way. He expected as they drew closer Marion would too. They have to demonstrate he didn't act with wanton disregard. To go to court and rely solely on Marion was trespassing so tough luck we don't even have to try avoid an accident would be the plaintiffs councils dream.

[chapmaja]

The appellate court opinion. https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/c ... 355-2.html

If it goes to trial the railroad stands a good chance of loosing. That Marion was trespassing would be a defense if they had rounded a curve and there he was 100' away, or he stepped in front of the train and there was no opportunity to stop. The key element is the engineer and conductor allegedly discussing that Marion wasn't hearing the horn and continuing on. It depends on the case the defense mounts. For example the engineer in his career approaches trespassers every week or every day. They always hear the horn and step out of the way. He expected as they drew closer Marion would too. They have to demonstrate he didn't act with wanton disregard. To go to court and rely solely on Marion was trespassing so tough luck we don't even have to try avoid an accident would be the plaintiffs councils dream.

I completely agree. I think this gets settled out of court unless this is appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court and they reverse the appeals court ruling (which I don't think will happen).