Railroad Crossings Need Lights and Gates

Railroad crossings are dangerous places.  Trains are rolling down a track with an inability to stop if a car is on the track.  Those cars need to be adequately warned before ever getting on the track.  The best protection to warn these cars are flashing lights and gates.  However, railroad companies do not want to install these safety devices.  Safety devices cost money and spending money cuts into profits.

The railroad companies also claim that if the federal government provided any federal funds for warning signs at these intersections, then state law claims cannot proceed- i.e they are preempted by federal law.  Railroad companies have been very successful with this defense in Alabama.  They have relied on affidavits from the state department of transportation claiming that federal funds were used at all intersections in the state.

We, along with Bob Pottroff (http://www.pottroff.com/ ), a lawyer from Kansas recently were involved in a case where there were no flashing lights and gates at the crossing.  We contended that due to the lack of adequate warnings, our client, a passenger in a truck, suffered terrible permanent injuries.  Instead of accepting the general affidavits that said federal monies were used around the state, we took the depositions of finance and safety crossing personnel at the department of transportation.  Those individuals reviewed all the department records available to them and could not conclude that federal funds were actually used at the crossing where this wreck occurred.

Because general assertions are not sufficient in a court of law, the judge agreed with us that  the railroad had to prove that the federal money was used at the intersection in question.  They were unable to do it here.  The judge denied their summary motion to dismiss the case and allowed us to proceed with our state law claims.

Our discovery along with the judge’s ruling has a huge impact on the safety of vehicles crossing railroad tracks in Alabama where the railroad is not utilizing the best warning devices to protect the public.  Unless the railroad can show that federal monies were used at the crossing in question,  juries will now be able to decide whether light and gate warnings should have been used.  If lights and gates would have protected the occupants of a car from ever getting on the track and the failure to install them caused the wreck, then injured person are entitled to recover from the negligent railroad.

If federal money is going to be used to hide behind the failure to protect the public, then the railroad should make sure the federal monies we paid in taxes are used for our benefit—not the railroad’s benefit.