On the subject of litigation

The Junk Drawer is for those Off Topical discussions where we can ask questions of the community that we feel might have the ability to help out.

Moderators: Harold_V, websterz

User avatar
makinsmoke
Posts: 1834
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:56 pm
Location: Texas Hill Country

On the subject of litigation

Post by makinsmoke » Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:33 am

RENO, Nev. – A Nevada trucking company has filed suit again Amtrak and Union Pacific, claiming they failed to maintain a safe railroad crossing at the site where one of its drivers plowed into an Amtrak train last month, killing six people and injuring at least 20 others.
The Reno Gazette-Journal reports that in documents filed Friday in Reno federal court, John Davis Trucking Co. claims the companies didn't adequately warn drivers of oncoming trains.
Union Pacific and Amtrak representatives did not immediately respond to the complaint.
The Amtrak passenger train was en route from Chicago to the San Francisco Bay area on June 24 when Lawrence Valli's truck crashed through the crossing gates about 70 miles east of Reno, Nev., and into one of the cars.
Amtrak earlier filed suit against John Davis Trucking, alleging negligence in its training of the truck's driver.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/30/ne ... z1TgZ1GK00

Key takeaway: "Crashed through the crossing gates...."

Another frivolous lawsuit.

User avatar
gwrdriver
Posts: 3057
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:31 am
Location: Nashville Tennessee

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by gwrdriver » Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:58 am

Frivilous depends upon the perspective. This is probably about attempting to spread the liability. The passenger lawsuits will name Amtrac/UP as co-defendants and Amtrac/UP will certainly ask the court to be dismissed as defendants and cleared of liability. If Truck didn't file a countersuit, and hope some of it sticks, they would essentially be admitting they are 100% at fault. If Truck can show that Amtrac/UP had at least a small percentage of fault they can then hope to have Amtrac/UP share the damage awards.
GWRdriver
Nashville TN

User avatar
Fender
Posts: 2681
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 8:33 pm
Location: Chattanooga TN

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by Fender » Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:54 am

Gotta love the way our U.S. legal system operates. Not who's at fault, but who can pay. It's somewhat akin to why Bonnie and Clyde robbed banks, "That's where the money is." Or, was it John Dillinger who said that (?).
Dan Watson

User avatar
BAdams
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:15 pm
Location: Moreno Valley, CA

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by BAdams » Sun Jul 31, 2011 10:56 am

The court will toss this out. It's laughable on it's face.
Here's the view that the truck driver had heading North on 95 (thanks Google):
The Amtrak was headed from right to left in this image.
Nothing obstructs the view for miles, the train would have been clearly seen long before the grade crossing lights came on.
Attachments
NV_amtrak.jpg

User avatar
steamin10
Posts: 6712
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 11:52 pm
Location: NW Indiana. Close to Lake Michigan S. tip

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by steamin10 » Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:26 am

Another tired trucker with automatic driving skills? Sad but the human brain can get the autopilot going and ignore new input.

Lawyers always head for the Easy and deep pockets. Thats how they get payed.
Big Dave, former Millwright, Electrician, Environmental conditioning, and back yard Fixxit guy. Now retired, persuing boats, trains, and broken relics.
We have enough youth, how about a fountain of Smart. My computer beat me at chess, but not kickboxing
It is not getting caught in the rain, its learning to dance in it. People saying good morning, should have to prove it.

Frisco1522
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:54 pm

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by Frisco1522 » Sun Jul 31, 2011 1:37 pm

99.2% of the lawyers give the rest a bad name

User avatar
SteveM
Posts: 6859
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 6:18 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by SteveM » Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:17 pm

Fender wrote:It's somewhat akin to why Bonnie and Clyde robbed banks, "That's where the money is." Or, was it John Dillinger who said that (?).
No, that was Willie Sutton.

Steve

hammermill
Posts: 2938
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: pendleton or

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by hammermill » Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:10 pm

i wonder if it really isnt the insurance companys of couse i have always contended our town had 2 many lawyers when we got the second one .

User avatar
Orrin
Posts: 307
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:24 pm
Location: SE Washington State, near Moscow, Idaho

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by Orrin » Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:24 pm

Gotta love the way our U.S. legal system operates. Not who's at fault, but who can pay.
Once-upon-a-time I was sued because I was the only one in a multi-vehicle pile-up who carried auto insurance. The party suing me agreed that someone else caused the accident; but, they were trying to pin contributory negligence upon me.

The jury decided in my favor; however, the whole experience aged me about ten years.

Orrin
So many projects, so little time.

spro
Posts: 7541
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:04 pm
Location: mid atlantic

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by spro » Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:06 pm

The lawyers always go after the deepest pocket. There have been many tested drugs in recent years which helped that segment of the population they were intended for. So, since drug companies have money there are continually adverts to where viewers are advised to join X lawfirm to (class action ) Sue the manufacturers'. It's Not just the user, if a baby had any number of birth or developement problems, it's alleged the drug was responsible. so the law firm gets about 20 million and any recorded complaintant gets about $3.00 and the firm goes looking for another case. This of course leaves the r&d in shambles and prices go higher.

User avatar
steamin10
Posts: 6712
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 11:52 pm
Location: NW Indiana. Close to Lake Michigan S. tip

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by steamin10 » Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:55 pm

Yep, but how do you balance that against the Thalidamide disaster?

It is never fair. Each case is ruled by its facts and history. If you have any court experience, you will know that truth and reason are the first casualties, and that profile and gamesmanship rule.
Big Dave, former Millwright, Electrician, Environmental conditioning, and back yard Fixxit guy. Now retired, persuing boats, trains, and broken relics.
We have enough youth, how about a fountain of Smart. My computer beat me at chess, but not kickboxing
It is not getting caught in the rain, its learning to dance in it. People saying good morning, should have to prove it.

User avatar
Walt Lindsay
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:18 pm
Location: Wellington, Nevada

Re: On the subject of litigation

Post by Walt Lindsay » Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:31 pm

HELLO all

It appears to me that all of this post is right on, BUT there is one thing that is missing.
We must all remember that from the White House and down ‘APPOX’ 95% of all our leaders
are lawyers. To speak out against lawyers is un American (sic)

OK Harold I just could not resist this, if this is too much ‘poly-ticking’, well................... :?:
WALT

In the event of an EXTREME EMERGENCY most of those who are prepared will survive,
all the rest will perish.
KE6IWK

Post Reply