On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 2:36:38 PM UTC-5, Phil Kane wrote:   
      
   > About the same time that both the railroads and the jurisdictions   
   > involved realized that both were open to litigation, whether justified   
   > or frivolous, and it was necessary to be abundantly cautious.   
      
   Don't railroads have a pretty good immunity defense based in long-standing law?   
      
   For instance, we had a tragedy where a lovesick teen threw herself in front of   
   an Acela.  The tear-jerk factor in such a case would be very high, and they   
   could claim the station failed to have fencing or otherwise adequate   
   protection.  But, AFAIK,    
   lawsuits aren't filed when someone at a station jumps in front of a train, or,   
   a trespaser his hit while walking along the trackbed.  I would guess that the   
   railroads have immunity*.   
      
      
      
   *We had a sad case where a school bus jumped the curb and crushed a girl   
   against a wall.  She was very badly injured, including loss of a leg.  She got   
   a $14 million court award, but it was ordered reduced to $500,0000 as the   
   immunity limit of liability.    
    Her medical bills and rehab costs alone probably significantly exceeded that   
   amount.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)