Passenger Trains > More Cascades 501 legal action and payout

https://mynorthwest.com/1737327/teen-nearly-killed-in-deadly-amtrak-derailment-latest-to-sue/
  
https://mynorthwest.com/1598202/amtrak-detailment-lawsuit-payout/

Is anyone suing the at-fault engineer?

Duna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is anyone suing the at-fault engineer?

Who determined he was at fault?  And accident lawyers don't count.

Literally anyone with common sense and a engineers card, except the federal government.
PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Duna Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Is anyone suing the at-fault engineer?
>
> Who determined he was at fault?  And accident
> lawyers don't count.

Posted from iPhone

Duna Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is anyone suing the at-fault engineer?

Among other things, the engineer's assets and insurance coverage are minimal in relationship to the total damages; suing him  would get essentially nothing.  In addition, he is an Amtrak employee and Amtrak is responsible (under the principle of respondeat superior) for any harm he caused.  Thus suing him wouldn't benefit the plaintiffs.  Amtrak might be able to seek to recover from him, but again there probably isn't much there.  Finally, one of the theories of Amtrak's (and other defendants') liability, as I understand it, is that they failed to give the engineer proper training.  Suing him might undercut that theory.

swingnose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Literally anyone with common sense and a engineers
> card, except the federal government.

Okay, so nobody who's opinion will stand up in court.
Until the final NTSB report comes out nothing is going to happen in court.
The ambulance chasers can file all the lawsuits they want but until ALL of the investigations are complete ain't nothing going to happen in the courtroom or anywhere else.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/20 20:24 by PHall.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Until the final NTSB report comes out nothing is going to happen in court.   The ambulance chasers call file all the lawsuits they want but until ALL of the investigations are complete ain't nothing going to happen in the courtroom or anywhere else.

The final report has been released.  

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20190624.aspx

This is going to be a very costly settlement process because blame has been spread across many parties  ---  parties that also have deep pockets.  

* * * * * * * * * 
Page 58   Lines 19-24

Q.  It seems in this case Amtrak deemed you qualified after one roundtrip, as well as all the other engineers, but do you think that you had enough territory familiarity after one roundtrip to run that? 

A. I wouldn't have gotten behind the throttle if I didn't feel comfortable with it.  

https://dms.ntsb.gov/public/61000-61499/61332/616779.pdf

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Duna Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Is anyone suing the at-fault engineer?
>
> Who determined he was at fault?  And accident
> lawyers don't count.

If a train wrecks going 50 mph over the speed limit in a 30 mph curve, whose fault is it if it is not the man at the controls?  What a buck stops nowhere argument!

Something to watch: Amtrak has a policy that passengers can not sue them. This Amtrak policy is shaky at best and probably indefensible. It will last only until a plaintiff appears, who is persistent and going after deep pockets. This has now probably happened.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/20 19:18 by GenePoon.

Add to that, I believe that Amtrak has a cap of $200 million paypout per incident. That will add up quickly in this case. 

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Something to watch: Amtrak has a policy that
> passengers can not sue them. This Amtrak policy
> is shaky at best and probably indefensible. It
> will last only until a plaintiff appears, who is
> persistent and going after deep pockets. This has
> now probably happened.

But that was added after this wreck wasn't it?

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PHall Wrote:

> > Who determined he was at fault?  And accident
> > lawyers don't count.
>
> If a train wrecks going 50 mph over the speed
> limit in a 30 mph curve, whose fault is it if it
> is not the man at the controls?  What a buck
> stops nowhere argument!



People often confuse reality with what a "court" or judge decides.  (OJ)

dan Wrote:

> But that was added after this wreck wasn't it?

Yes, that's what I recall.

radar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dan Wrote:
>
> > But that was added after this wreck wasn't it?
>
> Yes, that's what I recall.
==================================
But prior to the filing of the recent lawsuits.

The $200 million cap is codified; it is Federal law.  Amtrak's "You can't sue us, yadda-yadda" is not a law.
It is a policy that they, themselves established unilaterally, and very likely indefensibly, and which deserves
its place in the garbage can of legal history.

Amtrak has not prohibited passengers from seeking damages for its fault.  What it has done is require mandatory arbitration, something that more and more businesses are doing to try to limit their losses.  Arbitration (before a theoretically neutral arbitrator) can have many of the consequences of a lawsuit, including awards of substantial damages (I know of one medical enterprise that gave up on mandatory arbitration some years ago because it got hit with sizeable malpractice awards that it couldn't appeal), and it can have many of the same procedural rights for the injured party.  However, mandatory arbitration clauses almost always prohibit class actions; thus it's not possible to combine many relatively small claims into one case, with the result that no one may sue because no individual case is large enough for the damages to cover the attorney fees.  In addition, especially for small claims, the arbitrator has to be thinking about whether the company will agree to use him/her for another case, which may produce some unwillingness to grant the injured party full damages.  For these and other reasons many businesses have mandatory arbitration clauses in their consumer contracts (check your credit card agreements and you're likely to find one).  Under the Federal Arbitration Act, as the Supreme Court has construed it, those clauses are enforceable even if the consumer never knew about them and, thus, never truly agreed to them.  Arbitration is useful for businesses and is often included in negotiated contracts; among other things, it's generally less expensive for major commercial disputes and gives the parties the answer much faster, generally with no possibility of appeal--thus businesses can get on with business.  For consumers, however, arbitration generally comes as a surprise and, for a number of reasons, including those I've suggested, can limit or even prevent recovery for genuine harm.  The Supreme Court's enforcement of mandatory arbitration clauses for non-negotiated consumer transactions is simply another example of how the Court has protected business in recent decades.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/20 09:50 by BobB.