Railroad Forums 

  • All Amtrak's Fault (Spuyten Duyvil trespasser fatalities)

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1536878  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Well, that's how the tort lawyers will spin it:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/15/nyre ... mmers.html

Fair Use:
..The two teenage boys knew how to swim, and one, confident he could handle the currents of Spuyten Duyvil Creek, jumped in from a bridge at Inwood Hill Park in Upper Manhattan.....a police official said the boys went missing after jumping from Spuyten Duyvil Bridge, which goes between Inwood in Manhattan and the Bronx. The swing bridge is used by Amtrak trains..
We report, you decide.
 #1536883  by David Benton
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2020 3:21 pm Well, that's how the tort lawyers will spin it:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/15/nyre ... mmers.html

Fair Use:
..The two teenage boys knew how to swim, and one, confident he could handle the currents of Spuyten Duyvil Creek, jumped in from a bridge at Inwood Hill Park in Upper Manhattan.....a police official said the boys went missing after jumping from Spuyten Duyvil Bridge, which goes between Inwood in Manhattan and the Bronx. The swing bridge is used by Amtrak trains..
We report, you decide.
Amtrak provided a fence , which denotes the area should not be accessed by the public. The fact there was a hole in it does not make them liable.
People grieving naturally want someone/ something to blame. Its understandable , if frustrating.
 #1536884  by DutchRailnut
 
lawyers do go for deepest pockets , if fence was poorly maintained , guess what.
 #1536886  by mtuandrew
 
Hate to say it, Mr. Benton, but Dutch is right. Look up the term “attractive nuisance” in American law and you’ll see that for over a hundred years property owners have had the responsibility to keep trespassers (in particular children) away from danger that they may not understand. If this goes to trial - and Amtrak may just settle with the families - the verdict will depend in large part on Amtrak’s records (when did they last fix the fence, how often do they patrol Spuyten Duyvil.)
 #1536893  by Tadman
 
The trial could cost millions, the settlement far less. They'll probably settle within six months.

These are literally known as "turntable cases". One of the earliest attractive nuisance cases in the US resulted from children finding their way onto a CB&Q turntable that was unattended, moving the table, and somehow losing a foot or leg in the process.
 #1536959  by Safetee
 
most states seem to only require fencing by railroads for protection of livestock. I believe that in new york state a railroad has to provide fencing for protection of the public only if the department of transportation specifically requires it to.
 #1536994  by ThirdRail7
 
This has been done many times before: If you erect the fence, you must maintain it. If you don't erect the fence, you're creating an attractive nuisance.

There is no real way to win this unless you have an extremely reasonable jury....which is why most companies just settle.
 #1537015  by quad50cal
 
The fence in question is decently robust - steel post fencing with jagged anti-climbing edges at the top of each post.Additionally there are warning signs in both Spanish and English.

It's not Amtrak's fault when the near entirety of Inwood Hill Park has a fully accessible waterfront.
 #1537056  by Ken W2KB
 
Backshophoss wrote: Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:48 pm The Hudson River/Harlem River confluence is full of Rip currents,eddys and a mix of salt/brackish/fresh waters
not a great place to swim,boat or fish at.
Even the Circle line boats have baad days there.
The early Dutch settlers named this dangerous waterway "Spuyten Duyvil" for a reason, it is translated more or less as "Spouting Devil", "Spewing Devil", "Spinning Devil".