Or, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of abject stupidity...

My apologies to the Moderators, but the magnitude of the award on this Federal lawsuit sets a national precedent that could easily sink any museum or tourist operation, and as such deserves notice.

Lesson in this appears to be ANY sort of hazard on your property better have some sort of specific warning label - and a simple "NO TRESPASSING" sign apparently is not sufficient:

"A federal jury awarded $24.2 million to two men who were severely burned by electrical wires when they trespassed onto railroad property and climbed atop a rail car".

http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/in ... 5898&rfi=8

Brings to mind a set of signage the Palisades Interstate Park Commission created in the 1970's with a list of about two dozen "DO NOT" activities, probably created with this sort of litigation in mind. The impression at the time that the signs were an insult to the intelligence of park visitors now appears to have been an overreaction, sad to say.

It is a shame they do not teach the fine art of being responsible for your own actions in law school. But this follows on the heels of the guy who sued the RV company when he set the cruise control and then left the wheel to make coffee. Yes, it ran off the road at the next curve. Doh! Or the dumb lady who put the hot McDonald's coffee between her knees and burnt herself. Twice! Yea, she did it again and tried to sue McDonald's again but this time it was thrown out. Sad state of affairs in this sue happy society we have become.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Before we rush to judgment ourselves, please remember: The publicity always goes to the jury awards, but those are VERY often 1) reduced severely by the presiding judge; 2) reduced upon appeal, or 3) totally overturned upon appeal.

In the famous "McDonald's hot coffee" case, the original award was largely reduced by the presiding court from $2.9 million to $480,000. See http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp and http://caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts .

Please remember that, far too often, one is told only part of a story in a case like this. Another example is/was the famous Ted Stevens "pork barrel" project of a $200 million "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. It was widely reported that the bridge was to an island that 1) had a ferry and 2) had 50 residents. Nobody in the popular media ever mentioned two factors that made the situation vastly different from a transportation standpoint: the island had an international airport, and was a port on one of the busiest inland shipping channels of the Pacific, with no less than six major shipping routes going under the proposed bridge. I'm not defending the bridge proposal, but I could just as easily condemn many major airport-connection Interstates on the exact same grounds that they serve a Zip code that nobody lives in..........

Sorry for the off-topic rant. But next time you get a jury summons, consider: Do you want to be tried by a jury full of people too stupid to get out of jury duty, or will you do your part to bring up the average IQ of the juries?

Also keep in mind that may of these stories about outsized jury awards have been embelished or are just urban legends - as is the one involving the Winnebago on cruise control.

Chris .

The two "Men" were actually skateboarding boys in their teens. Doesn't mean that they were not old enough to know the dangers though.

"Sorry for the off-topic rant. But next time you get a jury summons, consider: Do you want to be tried by a jury full of people too stupid to get out of jury duty, or will you do your part to bring up the average IQ of the juries"?

And if you do have the privilege to serve on a jury and you do not agree with the way this litigious society is going then make a difference, make the right decision

Did you notice that the one individual who was the least burned is currently fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan? So while this jury is making this reward, he is fighting for our freedom. Kind of ironic, isn't it? Not to flame our railroad brethern attorneys that frequent this board but I wonder how much of that lawsuit was designed to line the pockets of the lawyers?

Are there any electrical engineers in the house (dlocable?) who can tell us what the safe clearance distance is from 11,000 volts? I would think it is more than 6 feet which makes me wonder about the statement about the catenary only being 6 feet above the boxcar.

Be interesting to see where this one ends up.

That note about one plaintiff being on duty in Iraq made me ponder for a few moments too...

On the subject of "attractive nuisances", it occurred to me that in this day and age of no roofwalks, and short (if any) ladders on boxcars, to what (daresay unreasonable) lengths did these two genuises have to go to get on top of the equipment?

That simple question alone, with some supporting photos of the equipment, would hopefully have made one ponder the situation a bit deeper, as well....one would hope.

The press release on http://www.railpace.com/hotnews/ says they did find a car with ladders and roofwalk.

The short answer is called “Minimum Approach Distance” it is how close one can come to live (11,000 kv) exposed conductors is 2 ft. 2 in. from the tip of the out stretched hand. This is for a “qualified worker”. Based on the NESC not NEC tables.

I could give you the long answer but I doubt there is enough room on this board for it. If you want some real interesting reading go to OSHA.gov and look up CFR 1910.269. Then get recent copy of the NESC, National Electrical Safety Code. Oh and don’t forget NFPA 70E, have fun!! The standards mean different things to different workers, depending on who you work for.

Bottom line STAY AWAY!!!! Electricity does not care who you are, qualified or not.

Most states are 10 ft for unqualified worker, cranes and unisulated aerial lifts and the distance goes up as the voltage goes up. E.g. for 500 kv you need to be at least 25 ft away.

I checked out the story at truthorfiction.com and you are correct. The RV story is pure fabrication. The McDonald's lady got far less than most often reported, though the cool 1/4 million she did get ain't chump change.

We discussed this McDonald's case in a law course at business school. One of the points I made was that even after all this publicity, a fundamental message was still missing from McDonald's response. All the packaging now contains the message "Caution contents are HOT!". From a safety view, this really does not address the original problem. What the package should say is "Warning: hot beverages may cause burns!". The current warning just reinforces the "hey, dummy, tell me something I didn't know" reflex. Everybody knows coffee is hot, but everybody may not be mentally connecting that to bodily harm.

The way in which you phrase a warning or instruction is important, and also could decide your level of liability.

In terms of the high voltage incident, I don't support the full implication of the judgement. The verdict gave, I believe, 70% liability to NS and 30% liability to Amtrak, or the other way around. How about at least 50% liability for the kids? I don't say 100%, because there may need to be a public education campaign on the dangers of high voltage. It is pretty easy to understand not to touch power lines, but I did not realize I could get zapped just standing nearby. I have been on top of a freight car with a group of guys (including "the boss") at a museum with a live 600v DC line in reach, and I know that was pretty stupid in retrospect, but it never would have occurred to me to worry about flashover. The general public could benefit from some public service messages about this, at least in Pennsylvania.

Direct current, such as the 600-volts D.C. used by trolley lines, is not nearly as nasty to work around as 11,000 volts A.C. Alternating Current, particularly the higher voltages, is much more unpredictable than Direct Current. I've worked on "live" 600-volt trolley wire from a wooden platform on a line car and never had a problem. High voltage A.C. is known to arc to nearby objects, including humans. On the Pennsylvania RR, only certain qualified empoyees were allowed within reach of the 11,000 volt A.C. lines, even when the power was shut down and the wire was grounded. I believe the recommended distance to keep between oneself and those lines was 10 feet. The PRR used to issue employees an entire timetable supplement detailing acceptable behavior around the catenary, which DID NOT include climbing on top of railcars! Note the respect with which your local utility workers treat the power lines in your neighborhood.

In earlier years, the PRR instructions mentioned diamond shaped signs "High Wire" on one side, "Low Wire" on the other. Under "High Wire" (usually in yards), roof walks could be used for walking, but equipment with short pantagraphs couldn't reach the wire. There were also warnings about keeping firemen's tool handles and squirt hose streams away from the wire.