AP Writes Horrible Description of Helen Gable's Lawsuit Against Railroad
On Tuesday the Clarion-Ledger website posted this AP story about the lawsuit filed in Tupelo by a woman who was struck by a train. Here is a quote of the entire article:
Helen Gable was taking pictures on the railroad tracks in Tupelo in 2006 when a train nearly cut off her leg as she tried to get out of the way.
Gable and her husband are suing the railroad company for nearly $6 million.
Gable says the company should have posted trespassing signs to keep people away.
The lawsuit also claims the train was exceeding federal speed limits and that a cable was hanging off the side and cut her.
BNSF Railway Company spokeswoman Suann Lundsberg said the company is investigating and is sympathetic to Gable’s injuries, but “she admits in her lawsuit filing that she was trespassing” to take photos on the track.
Lundsberg also said BNSF has equipment that detects if something is hanging or dragging from a train.
The comments to the story are brutal and unanimously agree that the case is frivilous. But reading the entire Complaint makes the lawsuit sound more reasonable.
Here is the actual Complaint filed by the plaintiff. According to the Complaint, Mrs. Gable was six feet off of the tracks, but was hit by a cable hanging off the train as she tried to get further from the train. It does not sound normal that there would be a cable protruding six feet from a train. She alleges that she could not get further from the train because the train was speeding.
The plaintiff's attorney is Roy Parker of Tupelo and the railroad's lawyer is Billy Spencer with Mitchell McNutt in Tupelo. I do not know Parker. Spencer is a good lawyer and if the plaintiff's claim does not have merit, then I am confidant that he will win the case on behalf of the railroad. I have no idea what really happened and I have no opinion on the merits of the case.
Can anyone get the complaint to open??
The Complaint is now accessible.
It is against the law in all states to trespass on any private property without permission of the owner or without having an official reason. A number of the states specifically forbid trespassing on railroad property and facilities and codify it in their respective sections concerning railroads or utilities. Under Mississippi law, a trespasser is a person who enters the property of another "without license, invitation or other right." Kelley v. Sportsmen's Speedway, Inc., 224 Miss. 632, 644, 80 So.2d 785, 791 (1955).
Joe, first, even if she was trespassing the railroad still owes a duty to trespassers albeit a lesser one - to not wilfully, wantonly, reckless harm another (dragging a swinging cable and speeding could be considered reckless).
Second, even if she was trespassing, if a landowner knows or has reason to know people are rountinely traversing his land without permission (ie worn trails), but he does not take measures to stop this, he may be held to the ordinary standard of reasonable care. See page 4 paragraph C.
Third, paragraph seven of the complaint says she was standing near the Lumpkin Street intersection, which if that is the case she may not have even been trespassing as the crossing is a public intersection.
six foot cable? was anything else damaged/sliced along the way? i find this frivilous. all of this was caused by her inability to think about her her own safety.
If all vegetation is NOT cut down at least six feet away from the track, all the way BEFORE and AFTER the spot where this person was [stupidly]standing, the lawsuit is frivolous at best. If said vegetation was indeed cut down [by the alleged swinging cable] then the railroad should be fined [heavily]. BUT I knew, at age 3, not to go near the RR tracks except at a crossing, and then to leave the vicinity when I hear a train coming, which can be heard (and felt) long before the train gets in sight. At best this woman should be thanking God that she is alive after such a imbecilic move. But individual responsibility seems to be thrown aside when you can go for the 'deep pockets'.