The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 Presidents Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 Presidents Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Trial Academy Master Class 6.0
    • The Business Of Law
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

$2.5M Verdict Upheld Against Lumber Company that Blocked View of Oncoming Train

Posted on December 24, 2014 by Larry Bodine

The Virginia Supreme Court affirmed a $2.5 million wrongful death verdict for a driver killed by a train he could not see because a lumber company blocked his view with a tall stack of lumber.

Lumber company liable for wrongful death when lumber stack blocked view of oncoming train.

The driver was unable to see past the stacked lumber, and was struck and killed by the three-engine train going approximately 45 miles per hour.

In October 2004, truck driver Charles Settle, was making his seventh trip for the day across the private road and railroad crossing owned by Norfolk Southern Railroad in Haymarket, VA. It was controlled only with “cross buck signs,” according to court documents.

Norfolk also owned the right-of-way, extending 30 feet in each direction of the railroad track, which allowed for the “locomotive train crews and the public to safely proceed across the tracks” by “maintaining clear sight” for safety purposes, according to the testimony of a Norfolk representative.

The RGR, LLC lumber company operated a business of offloading lumber from train cars to tractor-trailers, adjacent to the Norfolk railroad track. At the time of the accident, their lumber was stacked seven feet high within the 30 foot right-of-way, “needlessly cutting down the visibility of a motorist,” according court testimony of the RGR owner.

Unable to see

The Virginia Supreme court affirmed that because of RGR’s negligence: Settles was unable to see past the stacked lumber, and crossed into the railroad track where he was struck and killed by the three-engine train going approximately 45 miles per hour, pulling more than 100 cars, according to the court ruling.

Settles widow reached a $500,000 settlement with Norfolk.  In their appeal, RGR argued that Settles widow failed to establish they had a duty of care, and denied they had a duty of care to take reasonable steps to make the railroad crossing safe as they did not own the property.  RGR also alleged that Settle shared in contributory negligence for failing to look and listen for the train, according to the court decision.

Lumber company duty of care

RGR argued that because Settle was on a private road and on the railroad crossing owned by Norfolk, they owed no duty to Settles because Virginia does not recognize a duty of reasonable care on obstructions on private property nor one to protect “mere sight lines,” according to the ruling.

The court ruled that RGR owed a legal duty of care to Settles and others, regardless of property ownership. It said the duty arises if an injury “could have been reasonably foreseen by the exercise of reasonable care,” thereby prompting a reasonable person to “avoid conduct that creates risks of harms to others.”

Other drivers who also crossed the track several times that day testified that they could not see the tracks behind the lumber stacks when they approached the tracks.

No contributory negligence

RGR alleged that Settles was contributorily negligent for “failing to look and listen for the train,” according to the court documents.  Evidence and testimony discussed in the court’s ruling showed that Settles could not have seen or heard the train.

Other drivers and an RGR employee also testified that they only heard the horn once, while others testified they never heard the train horn.  A truck operation expert witness testified that it was likely difficult for Settles to hear noise outside his truck cab.

The court affirmed the jury’s determination that Settles did not share in contributory negligence as he “had the duty to look and listen with reasonable care,” not the “absolute duty to discover the presence of the train.”

Settles, who was delivering gravel to a pipeline construction site, was familiar with the road and railroad crossing.  According to court documents, another driver testified that trucks would typically slow down and check for trains, and proceed without stopping if a train is not present.  The court also stated it could be inferred from Settles’ familiarity with the track, that he was aware that trains usually traveled in the opposite direction of the train that hit him.

Driver action was not the proximate cause of collision

The court also determined that Settles likely knew that the lumber stack blocked his view, which would force him to rely on his hearing to cross the track, but because the train horn was not sounded, Settles could not have taken any other actions to avoid the collision, refuting the claim by RGR that Settles actions were the proximate cause of the collision.

The jury and Virginia Supreme court affirmed that Settles was not negligent in his death, and that RGR’s lumber stacks obstructed Settles’ view, which was the proximate cause of him crossing the path of the train, causing his death.  The Jury and court affirmed Settle’s widow an award of $2.5 million against RGR, deducting the $500,000 already settled with Norfolk.

The case is RGR, LLC v. Settles, 764 S.E.2d 8 (Va. 2014).

Posted in Blog, Wrongful death

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

Total Settlement in Surfside Condo Collapse Tops $1 Billion

The proposed settlement reached nearly a year after the catastrophic Surfside building collapse along the South Flo[Read More...]
UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

UCLA Will Pay Nearly $700 Million in Abuse Lawsuits

The University of California system announced Tuesday it will pay nearly $375 million to more than 300 women who said they we[Read More...]
Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

Things to Consider When You Sue an Insurance Provider

We are all too acquainted with insurance coverage in our everyday lives. According to Investopedia, everyone should have[Read More...]
The Rochester Diocese Offers a $147 Million Settlement to Sex Abuse Survivors

The Rochester Diocese Offers a $147 Million Settlement to Sex Abuse Survivors

The Rochester Catholic Diocese is offering a $147 million settlement to sex abuse survivors. This offer comes as a federal ba[Read More...]
Jury Awards $77.5 Million to an Army Veteran in a 3M Earplug Case

Jury Awards $77.5 Million to an Army Veteran in a 3M Earplug Case

A jury in Pensacola, Fla., federal court on Friday ordered 3M to pay $77.5 million to a U.S. Army veteran who said he suffe[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.