Ill supreme court overturns a $3 M + injury award. May set a precedent ?
http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/contentview.asp?c=237372
Parents will be held much more responsible.
This wasn’t just entering upon railroad property; this was a kid who tried to jump on a moving freight train in order to impress his friends. His foot fell under a wheel that cut it off. The court found that since his parents let him roam “at large” with his friends he was able to recognize the danger of a moving freight train.
I in my younger days also trespassed on railroad property. Fortunately, I was never injured because of my foolish behavior.
I can’t beliieve this case went to the highest court in Illinois.
Good. Dont give these people a penny, hold them responsible for their actions. That’s what’s wrong with the world now, everyone is sue happy but they can’t accept responsibility for the dumb things they do.
At least there is now a definite precedent for such a decision.
I would hope that in future cases the first question asked in court is “did you know you were on railroad/private property?” If the answer is to the affirmative, the case gets thrown right straight out of court.
You can’t believe this case went to the highest court in Illinois?
I’m an Illinois native and resident. I am flat out dumbfounded that any Illinois court rulled this way. I would have expected them to give the plaintiff an extra couple million. Which would have then been desposited in the “proper” designated bank accounts.
Is there stil hope? Here’s a quote from the UNANIMOUS decision of the Illinois Supreme Court:
"In sum, because plaintiff was a trespasser, defendants (The Railroads) owed him no duty of reasonable care, except to refrain from willfully and wantonly injuring him, which plaintiff does not allege," Freeman wrote.
“It is always unfortunate when a child gets injured while playing,” he added, “but the responsibility for a child’s safety lies primarily with his parents, whose duty it is to see that the child does not endanger himself.”
I am really having trouble believing this came out of an Illinois court. Too much common sense, not enough corruption.
This similar story was in the paper the other week. Maybe there’s a chance we are not completely screwed as a country?
ELIZABETH — Neither a group of railroad companies nor an individual train’s conductor and engineer can be held liable for the death of a man who was struck and killed while walking along a stretch of tracks in Scotch Plains in 2009, according to a state Appellate Division decision released this week.
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20120919/NJNEWS/309190046/Wrongful-death-lawsuit-dismissed
Ditto, in my younger years while growing up in the suburbs of New York City my friends and I used to put pennies on the tracks of the NYC commuter lines (now Metro North) and thought that was really “cool” but we also knew we were doing something potentially dangerous and like others I was damned lucky that I was never injured. Nowadays I have a great respect for thousands of tons of steel moving at 60 plus MPH. This was a frivilous lawsuit to begin with and I’m also glad to see the court exercised some common sense. Too bad the lower court didn’t do as much as they would have saved the taxpayers of Illinois (which includes me) a lot of money we don’t have to waste.
No way…some court realized that allowing children to roam at large and therefore play in a rail yard and hop freight trains is the responsibility of the parents?
How dare they place responsibility on the parents, and make such silly statements as “Trains are recognizable dangers”…
Next thing ya know, they are going to say allowing kids to play with matches and guns are also dangerous and should be the responsibility of the parents to discourage such actions.
What’s next, making driving drunk a crime too?
Silly court…saying parents should act like…well, like parents.
Finally commonsense prevails…parents should be held responsble for the actions of their kids until the age of 18.
Thanks Ed for your firmly tongue in cheek response…the lack of parental “care” is one BIG reson for the extremely low (predicted by CPS to be 60.6% in 2012) high school graduation rate in the Chicago Public Schools.
It amazing, Common Sense prevails and everyone here is flabergasted. Says alot about the ways things usually go doesnt it.
[;)]
We have reached the point where common sense is no longer common.
Maybe the commonsense thing to do is to sue. Parents probably know they are responsible and that the kids should have known better…but they probably decided to milk the cash cow anyway to see if they could get a windfall out of it. They almost succeeded.
Perhaps they some some personal injury lawyer’s ad on TV. You’ve been hurt and somebody should pay. You pay nothing unles you win. UP should countersue to recover their legal expenses.
Loser should pay ALL legal costs for both parties.
It’s my understanding that in many cases, such suits rarely reach trial. Instead they are settled out of court for some lesser amount, since it’s cheaper for the defendant than letting the case go to trial.
Let’s face it, $25,000 would be a nice payday, even if the lawyer does get part of it.
In this case, however, UP pushed back - successfully.
As I recall, one of the hallmarks of tort reform is “loser pays,” which would certainly prompt more people to fight such a suit instead of settling. Even if the complaintant can’t afford to pay when they lose, it at least sends a message that it’s not an easy buck.
I suspect lawyers (sorry, Gabe) would be more selective about the cases they took on if it looked like they might not be successful.
Seems to me that we clearly have three distinct types of people in todays world: (1) those who are both book smart AND street smart (a really small minority), (2) those who are book smart but street dumb (a growing share) and (3) those who are just plain stupid (the majority and getting to be a larger share every day).
Don’t forget those who street smart but not book smart.
I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t think that 25K will make up for losing a foot. And that might be $12,500 after attorney fees and taxes. It’s certainly not the way I want to make a few bucks. Better for people to just stay off of our property.