Lawyers blame engineer in 2005 Metrolink train crash
Class Action News
Attorneys representing victims of a 2005 Metrolink train crash that killed 11 said this morning that they have uncovered new evidence that they believe shows the engineer was at fault for the accident.
The crash –- the second-deadliest in Metrolink history behind last September's incident in Chatsworth –- happened in the Glendale area after a train slammed into a sport-utility vehicle that had been left on the tracks.
The engineer noticed the reflection of the vehicle when he was about three-quarters of a mile away, but he waited until he was only 800 feet from the point of impact before applying the train’s emergency brakes, according to attorneys.
“He was duty-bound under the rules of Metrolink to put his train in emergency [braking],” attorney Jerome Ringler told reporters at a news conference. “Had he done so, there would have been no derailment.”
Ringler said his accusation is corroborated by data from the train’s event recorder box.
A spokesman for Metrolink, citing the pending civil case, said the agency had no comment on the allegations.
The driver of the sport-utility vehicle, Juan Manuel Alvarez, was convicted of murder and sentenced in August to 11 consecutive life terms. Prosecutors argued that Alvarez had intended to kill passengers in a twisted effort to gain attention from his estranged wife.
Ringler and attorney Brian Panish have filed a negligence lawsuit on behalf of a dozen victims against Metrolink. The case is scheduled to be heard in June in Superior Court.
Panish said operator error was a factor in the Glendale-area crash and the Chatsworth catastrophe that killed 25.
Federal safety investigators have said that preliminary evidence shows that the engineer in the Chatsworth crash sent and received dozens of text messages while on duty the day of the accident. The multi-agency probe, being led by the National Transportation Safety Board, is expected to take months to complete.
http://www.rkallp.com/metrolink-disaster-lawyers.html
Related listings
-
Settlement limits insurers' claims in Vioxx deal
Class Action News 01/23/2009Former Vioxx users getting part of a $4.85 billion settlement ending most personal injury suits over the withdrawn painkiller will get a bigger piece of the pie, thanks to an unusual settlement Thursday with their health insurers. Insurers who paid m...
-
Madoff Spinoffs - Another Investment Class Action
Class Action News 01/02/2009A class action in Manhattan Federal Court claims Tremont Market Neutral Fund was grossly negligent in handing over 27% of its money to Bernard Madoff for his alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme. Here are the defendants in the Tremont Funds...
-
Metrolink crash could lead to millions - possibly billions
Class Action News 09/22/2008Even as the first claim was made against Metrolink in the aftermath of the Chatsworth train disaster, legal experts are already saying the crash is likely to lead to hundreds of millions, if not billions in civil lawsuits.Metrolink's position, say ex...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.