Don't know what reminded me of this as I was about to fall asleep last night, but I figure with most of us gearing up for the coming operating season it's timely.

A few years back, there was an incident at Steamtown where a train nailed some kids on an ATV. The parents, of course, "shotgun sued." I never heard the outcome, so about a year ago I asked one of the other members of SCRM, who happens to be a lawyer, if he could find out. Turns out Steamtown was found to be partially responsible. I don't recall the exact amount but it was something like a third or a quarter. The judge claimed that since the RR knew people were crossing the tracks at that location they should have taken precautions to put a stop to it. The family got a much reduced settlement.

First off, I want to say that I think this outcome sucks. The kids were trespassing and the railroad shouldn't have to protect trespassers. I have no sympathy for either the kids or their family. This was, IMHO, a Darwinist clensing of the gene pool. The fact that they were young 'uns only means to me, "thank God they hadn't reproduced yet." Harsh, yeah, but my opinion. Unfortunately the courts seem bent on eroding all personal responsibility.

Now to my actual point. I'm sure that most operations have places on their lines where people habitually cross the tracks illegally. Just thought I'd give everyone a "heads up" about a potential liability. We've got a hunter's crossing on our line; whenever I'm in train service I insist that the horn and bell be sounded in this area whether it's hunting season or not. Don't know if that's sufficient but it's all I can do on my own.

The South Carolina Railroad Museum
mconrad@compuzone.net

Not on a tourist line, but all the same none the less...

The NS has had an ongoing legal battle with fishermen along the Susquehanna River who built docks that require a crossing of the tracks to get to. NS has forced them to use designated areas, sometimes a fair distance from their docks, to avoid the kind of "shotgun lawsuit" that you mention.

I have said it before, and I will say it again -- I am all in favor of a personal responsiblity law like Germany has, where if you do something stupid and die, the only thing you get is a discussion with Saint Peter. That is why Germany has parks that are actually old steel mills -- without OSHA-type railings and paint.

Of course, I am also for an "in-the-gauge" law, where if someone is injured while between the rails, they cannot sue. Horn or no horn. Bell or no bell. If ya' ain't smart enough to look before you cross, ya' probably shouldn't be allowed out of the house.

Anyway, those are my opinions and I speak only for myself.

Rob


rdavis@rypn.org

Railway Claim Services, Inc., which provides claims management for short line railroads, just sent out a newsletter (which I don't have with me) that addressed legal issues involving "trespassers", "licensees", and "invitees".

They usually get around to posting the newsletter on their web page, so you might find some useful information at www.railway-claim-services.com.

Alan Maples

AMaples@aol.com

When the Sacramento Northern line was purchased by the Western Railway Museum, we found a number of farm roads, and even skeet shooting platforms built across the line. In order to get it open even for MOW speeders the museum had to get the stuff removed.

In one case, we had to get te farmer to give us back a couple of sections of #60 rail from the line. Trains on long dis-used railroad tracks come as quite a surprise to people who live are farm along side them!

And for some reason the sheep are sure that the grass is greener on our right of way than the
pasture on their side of the fence!

ted_miles@nps.gov

What are the laws governing going through a funtcioning gate and light protected crossing for having an accident or no accident? And, any liability protection for the RR if there is an injury for said cause?

This is good for people and RR museums to know BEFORE they get hauled into court.

> What are the laws governing going through a
> funtcioning gate and light protected
> crossing for having an accident or no
> accident? And, any liability protection for
> the RR if there is an injury for said cause?

> This is good for people and RR museums to
> know BEFORE they get hauled into court.

I suggest you take your questions directly to the FRA and your state DOT. Don't speculate on what you hear on this or any other chat page. And you are right, be aware beforehand. FRA advised us to post our rails at crossings, something several of us had looked upon as unfriendly to locals. This year they will be posted.

And, I suspect even in the off season we could be liable. For several years now during the winter season, snowmobiling in and around Sumpter is looked upon favorably, especially by local merchants. They have for years used our tracks as a path when the snow appeared deep enough. We have looked the other way. Two winters ago we found where a snowmobile front ski had been stuck in a switch. By the looks of it the damage to the snowmobile might have been serious. Point is, if there had been an injury, and our tracks weren't posted I suppose the injured party could have claimed they had customarily used our tracks and we never objected, so we might be responsible for their safety. This is pure speculation, but nontheless the posting are going up soon. In the summer season they like to use our ROW with their ATVs. So a posting should relieve us of some if not all responsibility.

dan



http://www.svry.com
svry@pacifier.com

This also came up in a discussion with some of our railroad staff this afternoon. We were discussing the necessity of posting No Trespassing signs at locations where certain structures such as tunnels and bridges exist. These structures are legally considered attractive nuisances. Posting No Trespassing signs helps to reduce the risk of liability and can save the railroad money but it may not prevent the railroad from being taken to court and defending itself.

As for crossings, the best one is the one that isn't there. Second best alternative is having signals and having your staff trained to investigate the incident and complete the required reports accurately. Being able to prove that the crew sounded the horn and bell and that the signals were functioning properly is the best defense. It is important to see that your conductors are properly trained to gather the necessary information and properly complete the report forms, since they're the ones who will have to do it when a grade crossing incident happens. I've had to handle one investigation and report when I was conductor on a train that was involved in a nighttime grade crossing incident and I still remember what happened clearly. The fact that our crew did everything by the book saved us a lot of grief.

awalker2002@comcast.net

FRA advised us to post our rails
> at crossings, something several of us had
> looked upon as unfriendly to locals. This
> year they will be posted.

What exactly will you be posting.

Nevada Northern Railway Museum
nnry1@mwpower.net

> FRA advised us to post our rails

> What exactly will you be posting.

I'm not at the railroad right now, so I can't answer exactly what the signs say. They are made up, have out SVRy logo on them, and say no trespassing plus a few other word (I think by permission only, but not sure). They were in the yard office last time I was on site. Jerry can tell you what they say if he hears this.

They are to be attached to the crossbuck post as per suggestion by FRA folks from Vancouver, WA.

http://www.svry.com
svry@pacifier.com

> Now to my actual point. I'm sure that most
> operations have places on their lines where
> people habitually cross the tracks
> illegally. Just thought I'd give everyone a
> "heads up" about a potential
> liability. We've got a hunter's crossing on
> our line; whenever I'm in train service I
> insist that the horn and bell be sounded in
> this area whether it's hunting season or
> not. Don't know if that's sufficient but
> it's all I can do on my own.

Matt,

Looking at the other side of the coin, view it as a jury potentially could. If the train sounds the horn and bell in this location, there is the distinct possibility that a lawyer could claim the RR recognized the location in question as a bona fide public or private crossing, and did not provide adequate protection for those using it!

If the crossing is not recognized by the RR, the best bet is to take steps to remove it and discourage trespassing... including fences and/or barriers to prevent persons from entering or crossing the property. Those steps should also include a generous amount of conspicuously displayed no trespassing signs.

However, if the crossing is recognized by the RR as either a public or private intersection of rights of way, adequate warning signage, trimming of brush, and posting of no trespassing signs at entrances to RR property is a must.

As others have said, contacting the FRA and getting some solid CFR advice is a must. Simply assuming that you're doing right by sounding the horn, and listening only to the advice presented here, could actually increase your responsibility in the court's eyes...


Fiv4HghStk@aol.com

> I'm not at the railroad right now, so I
> can't answer exactly what the signs say.
> They are made up, have out SVRy logo on
> them, and say no trespassing plus a few
> other word (I think by permission only, but
> not sure). They were in the yard office last
> time I was on site. Jerry can tell you what
> they say if he hears this.

> They are to be attached to the crossbuck
> post as per suggestion by FRA folks from
> Vancouver, WA.
Dan, I looked at the signs yesterday. Across the top in large letters "NO TRESPASSING". Below that the circular Sumpter Valley Railway logo. Below this across the bottom in bold letters "RAILROAD PROPERTY".


http://www.svry.com
jamesbane@hotmail.com