# Can passenger delayed by accident when train hits truck sue



## Joe_W (Jul 22, 2016)

I just read about the delayed Amtrak train in Mississippi when it hit a truck on the tracks. If the delay caused me minor injuries or caused a late arrival which resulted in additional expense or missing something I paid for such as hotel or connection or whatever, could I sue the trucking company for damages or do I have to take it up with Amtrak? I am supposing Amtrak would provide compensation for injuries and "pain and suffering" but not anything caused by the late arrival.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Jul 22, 2016)

If you get stuck on an interstate highway due to an accident that closes all lanes, would you sue the person who caused the accident if it resulted in add'l expense or missing something?


----------



## Randall Sluder (Jul 22, 2016)

Joe,

I don't know how to respond politey.

Although, Not everything is a lawsuit.


----------



## KmH (Jul 22, 2016)

You can file any kind of lawsuit you want to file.

All it takes is money.

Note that filing a suit doesn't mean you will be adjudicated any compensation as a result of your lawsuit.

Indeed, even if your were to prevail it's quite possible whatever compensation you were awarded would fail to cover what it cost you to pursue the lawsuit.

Yes. Late arrival is something Amtrak has no control over as late arrival can be caused by factors beyond Amtrak's control - like weather, people who trespass on the railroad right of way, failures of infrastructure on the majority of track mileage Amtrak does not own or operate, and by those unable to ensure they don't have their vehicle on the rails when an Amtrak train is wanting to use said tracks.


----------



## Joe W (Jul 22, 2016)

KmH said:


> Yes. Late arrival is something Amtrak has no control over as late arrival can be caused by factors beyond Amtrak's control - like weather, people who trespass on the railroad right of way, failures of infrastructure on the majority of track mileage Amtrak does not own or operate, and by those unable to ensure they don't have their vehicle on the rails when an Amtrak train is wanting to use said tracks.


My original title (cut off) had

Can passenger delayed by accident when train hits truck sue the trucking company

I know Amtrak, like the airlines, is not responsible for late trains. But the trucker (and therefore his company) are. As to suing, small claims court if the trucking company has a local presence would cost little. And if the expenses or loss had documentation, ...


----------



## MikefromCrete (Jul 22, 2016)

This is America. You can sue anybody for anything at any time. Of course you might not win or the court could throw out the lawsuit and it would end up costing you a lot of money, but that's the chance you take.


----------



## BCL (Jul 22, 2016)

Amtrak's contract of carriage would clearly mention that they're not liable for consequential damages for being late. No passenger transportation provider would fail to put that in their terms.

As for physical injuries, that's another matter.


----------



## crabby_appleton1950 (Jul 23, 2016)

MikefromCrete said:


> This is America. You can sue anybody for anything at any time. Of course you might not win or the court could throw out the lawsuit and it would end up costing you a lot of money, but that's the chance you take.


Isn't there an expression that says you can sue a ham sandwich? Of course, winning is a different issue.


----------



## tp49 (Jul 23, 2016)

crabby_appleton1950 said:


> MikefromCrete said:
> 
> 
> > This is America. You can sue anybody for anything at any time. Of course you might not win or the court could throw out the lawsuit and it would end up costing you a lot of money, but that's the chance you take.
> ...


The expression is "you can indict a ham sandwich" but I suppose you could sue one too, I mean this is America the land of the lawsuit there may even be an obligation to do so. :giggle:


----------



## KmH (Jul 23, 2016)

Whatever you do, it's best to get your information from the horse's mouth

https://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1241337896158



> (My emphasis)
> *Disclaimer of Liability*Amtrak's fares, time schedules, equipment, routing, services and information (hereinafter "Amtrak services") are not guaranteed and are provided "as is" without any warranties of any kind, either express or implied, and Amtrak disclaims all warranties, express or implied. Applicable law may not allow the exclusion of implied warranties, so the above exclusions may not apply to you.
> 
> Amtrak reserves the right to change its policies without notice.
> ...


You might also want to look at:

https://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1246045341993


----------



## BCL (Jul 24, 2016)

Have you been in an accident? Have you witnessed an accident? Have you suffered psychological damage from hearing someone describe an accident he saw?

Hello, I'm Barry Green, of the law firm of Green & Fazio, here with another Litigation Myth.

Myth #4: You cannot file for an accident in which you were not involved. False.

We at Green & Fazio realize that when an accident occurs, it's not just those involved who suffer. That's why we've pioneered in whole new areas of accident litigation, including Bystander Trauma, Phantom Whiplash, and Near-Collision Stress Disorder. Why not come in for a free consultation and let us help you collect the money you didn't even realize you were entitled to?

Myth #8: In order to be successful, a lawsuit must have merit. False.

At the law firm of Green & Fazio, we know that some of the most lucrative lawsuits are nuisance suits. you see, today's large corporations and wealthy individuals would rather settle out-of-court than deal with the headaches, the harassment, of endless emotionally draining litigation. And no one harasses defendents like Green & Fazio.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Jul 24, 2016)

If you did sue the trucking company, they would now doubt try to sue Amtrak for not having enough padding in their timetables to allow for vehicle strikes and therefore putting the trucking firm at risk of litagation.


----------



## PVD (Jul 24, 2016)

Amtrak itself has the luxury of having its casrs litigated in Fedral Court, a trucking company woukd not have that provision. If they tried to bring in Amtrak with a 3rd party impleader, it would likely be tossed. An action against the trucking company, or a private vehicle's owners, or the operators of either might prove to be "tilling at windmills", winning a judgement and collecting are 2 different things. Since the odds of a "big score" are pretty limited without some serious injuries, it might be difficult to get attorneys to take the case. In many jurisdictions, a party in a small claims case can have the case moved to the regular Civil Court, now handling the case yourself is not so simple. Remember, it is likely an insurance company army of lawyers you are opposing, not a company or person.


----------



## KmH (Jul 24, 2016)

Is a public online train forum a good place to be seeking legal advice?


----------



## PVD (Jul 24, 2016)

Probably not. Just an observation that if there was good money in it, the lawyers would be advertising for it. Think of companies whose freight is delayed by the non passenger rail crossing accidents that occur everyday. The numbers of crossing accidents is way higher than the passenger involved ones that make the news.


----------



## tp49 (Jul 24, 2016)

PVD said:


> Amtrak itself has the luxury of having its casrs litigated in Fedral Court, a trucking company woukd not have that provision.


Not necessarily true.


----------



## jimsinsky (Aug 7, 2016)

PVD said:


> Probably not. Just an observation that if there was good money in it, the lawyers would be advertising for it. Think of companies whose freight is delayed by the non passenger rail crossing accidents that occur everyday. The numbers of crossing accidents is way higher than the passenger involved ones that make the news.


if someone caused a wreck on the LA freeway, could the thousands of people who were late for work because of it sue that driver?


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 7, 2016)

It's amazing how little average Americans know about their own legal system. There really should be a mandatory course in high school about this.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 7, 2016)

Civics used to be mandatory in Texas High Schools and Government in Colleges, but not sure it's still that way since so many people seem to be so ignorant about Government including a Presidential Candidate!


----------



## KmH (Aug 7, 2016)

It's stunning the number of people that have no clue how many US Senators or Congressmen represent them in Washington DC.

Legal knowledge is usually based on urban legend and uneducated guesses.


----------



## tp49 (Aug 7, 2016)

KmH said:


> It's stunning the number of people that have no clue how many US Senators or Congressmen represent them in Washington DC.


That answer's easy. It's none of them unless they're a special interest than it's all of them. :giggle: :hi:


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry (Aug 11, 2016)

ScouseAndy said:


> If you did sue the trucking company, they would now doubt try to sue Amtrak for not having enough padding in their timetables to allow for vehicle strikes and therefore putting the trucking firm at risk of litagation.


 wouldn't it be the drivers fault for being on the tracks when there is a train coming? The Supreme Court ruled trains have the right of way, because usually laws that fight physics don't work too well.


----------



## unitedstatesfan (Aug 18, 2016)

Those of us who live in countries that have inherited British judicial and executive systems find it difficult to understand why so many USA residents seem to believe that taking legal action is beneficial.

Everyone pays for this, one way or another.


----------



## me_little_me (Aug 18, 2016)

unitedstatesfan said:


> Those of us who live in countries that have inherited British judicial and executive systems find it difficult to understand why so many USA residents seem to believe that taking legal action is beneficial.
> 
> Everyone pays for this, one way or another.


Some deserve to pay for it. The aforementioned truck driver's "error" resulted in a lot of damage, a lot of delayed passengers and a lot of work for the first responders. The driver and/or the company that employed him will learn a financial lesson. The idea is that such a lesson increases their insurance costs which generally results in attempts to mitigate those costs by future driving safety. They may increase their rates to cover higher costs but if their safer brethren don't need to, they are at an income/expense disadvantage. This has nothing to do with frivolous or phone lawsuits whose primary purpose is to enrich the attorneys (both sides) involved.


----------

