Western Railroad Discussion > Judge recuses himself from Texas train crash suit.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/state&id=9023936

Why?

i agree that the judges actions should be the big story and that he did the right thing by recusing himself ... he knows deep down the lawsuit is frivolous ... well not so much frivolous but aimed at the wrong DEEP POCKETS <key words< party which we all knew on here that the litigants who would bring this lawsuit would go after what they think(and wrongly so) is the easy target because the litigants don't want to admit that their friends and local acquaintences are TOTALLY responsible for the fatally tragic events that day and that the event planners made some really bad decisions in implementing the failed safety planning of the parade event for not protecting the parade route

A judge is required to step aside if there is a conflict of some sort; typically it is because he learns of a friendship or family relationship between himself or one of his close staff members and a litigant. Whether frivolous or not, THIS is why they step aside.

But what do I know - I'm just a lawyer. I'll leave it up to the real experts here.

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA

One of my supervisors at CSX was named Satterwhite. I want to say his name was Ron, he was the Baltimore Division Superintendent I believe (this was 15 years ago). Maybe this judge comes from a railroad family. If that is the case it sounds like a legit conflict of interests to me.

john1082 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A judge is required to step aside if there is a
> conflict of some sort; typically it is because he
> learns of a friendship or family relationship
> between himself or one of his close staff members
> and a litigant. Whether frivolous or not, THIS is
> why they step aside.
>
> But what do I know - I'm just a lawyer. I'll
> leave it up to the real experts here.


Yes.

Failing to step aside opens up the judge to enormous criticism when (and it's almost always just a matter of time) the facts come out. Somebody will always "drop a dime" and pick up a buck from the losing side for that kind of useful info

"But what do I know - I'm just a lawyer. I'll leave it up to the real experts here"
Good for you, John....'man gots to know his limitations'. Just kidding of course. Your line was pretty much spot on!

I don't blame him either on making that move because all these lawsuits that target the railroads to me, especially after the Metrolink Disaster in Glendale, show's how narrow minded the survivors are when it comes to accidents like that! they just blame the railroads without looking at the facts!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't blame him either on making that move
> because all these lawsuits that target the
> railroads to me, especially after the Metrolink
> Disaster in Glendale, show's how narrow minded the
> survivors are when it comes to accidents like
> that! they just blame the railroads without
> looking at the facts!


Grow up - recusal has nothing to do with the merits of the suit - rather, it deals with a possible conflict between the litigants (on either side) with the court.

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA