California Train Crash Highlights Cap on Victims' Recovery
As the full amount of damages caused by the 2008 California train crash in Chatsworth is assessed, tort reform advocates are questioning the amount plaintiffs can recovery in future train-crash lawsuits.

September 15, 2011 /24-7PressRelease/ -- As the full amount of damages caused by the 2008 California train crash in Chatsworth is coming to light, tort reform advocates and members of Congress are calling into question a federal limit on the amount plaintiffs can recovery in future train-crash lawsuits.

Tragic California Train Accident

In 2008, a passenger train collided head-on with a freight train in Chatsworth, California. According to court records, 24 people were killed and more than 100 were injured in the tragic accident.

Officials from the National Transportation Safety Board said the crash was caused by the passenger train engineer, who failed to stop the train for a red light on the tracks. The engineer was allegedly texting someone on his cell phone at the time and missed the light.

Federal Damages Cap Limits Recovery

The passenger train company, owned by the French company Veolia Environment, decided to admit fault for the crash and pay the full amount of damages permitted under federal law. Under the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997, the total damages amount that a company may be ordered to pay to victims and their families for a single train crash in the U.S. may not exceed $200 million, so the company has consented to pay $200 million in damages.

While $200 million may seem like sufficient funds at first glance, the federal damages cap for train-crash lawsuits pays no attention to the number of people injured or killed, the extent of their injuries or the needs of their families after the accident.

California personal injury attorneys say that, in this way, the federal law replaces the role of juries in personal-injury lawsuits by deciding what the total damages award may be before a trial takes place, even if the amount of damages resulting from a particular crash is greater than the cap amount and even if the responsible party is capable of paying more.

The California train crash exemplifies the shortcomings of the federal damages cap because the amount of damages permitted is not sufficient to fully compensate the victims and their families. After considering evidence of the injuries and expenses presented by the victims and their families in court hearings, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Peter Lichtman and all of California's congressional delegates say that $200 million is not enough to compensate the victims and their families for their medical bills, lost income and other damages stemming from the accident.

Consequently, the legislators and other advocates are questioning whether the federal damages cap is appropriate and fair in its application to all train-crash cases, regardless of the magnitude of the crash. Further, they have asked Veolia Environment to set aside additional funds to adequately compensate the people directly affected by the tragedy.

Press Release Contact Information:

Findlaw PR