Mom hit with lawsuit near anniversary of son's death in train collision

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Mom hit with lawsuit near anniversary of son's death in train collision

LONDON, Ont. – She thought the visitor had come to tell her that warning lights and gates were about to be installed at the rail crossing where her son John's truck collided with a train two years ago.
She thought it might be a friend, offering comfort as the anniversary of his death nears.
Instead, Sharon Jobson was hit with a $500,000 lawsuit Tuesday for damage and inconvenience her son's fatal crash caused railway giant CN Rail.
"I couldn't believe it. I was shocked," the London-area woman said.
The lawsuit has sparked outrage among her friends on Facebook -- some calling it "callous," sickening" and a "money-grab." The posts include one from the sister of Gloyde Mills, who died at the same crossing 13 years earlier.
The CNR lawsuit alleges John Jobson, 22, was negligent when he didn't stop his pickup truck at the Pratt Siding crossing near Glencoe, Ont., on July 29, 2011. He collided with a westbound Via train, which derailed. Six of the 116 people aboard were injured.
The young farmer died in hospital six days later.
His mother, Sharon Jobson, has since campaigned for full lights, gates and bells at the double-track crossing and at several similar crossings where others have died or been hurt.
She won part of that battle -- Transport Canada, CNR and Southwest Middlesex all approved and budgeted for the $400,000 improvement this year -- and the safety equipment has been delivered to the township. Installation is expected within days.
A Transportation Safety Board report that said Jobson's truck didn't stop at the crossing also noted the crossing had non-standard warning signs, which were partly obscured by weeds. It also said the train's horn wasn't retrofitted to newer standards.
The CN lawsuit, though, says John Jobson was "wholly responsible" for the collision and Sharon Jobson, his executor, is his legal representative.
The suit alleges John was an incompetent driver who was speeding, shouldn't even have been driving, didn't stop at the stop sign nor heed the Via train horn, was inattentive and either didn't apply his brakes or did so too late.
It says CN "incurred substantial expense" to repair the tracks and extra expense from a bottleneck when the rail line had to be closed.
The allegations that haven't been proven in court.
CN wouldn't comment because the issue is in litigation.
The family has a lawyer, but they'd decided not to sue CN for what they still believe to be a succession of unsafe, minimally-protected crossings in the area.
Sharon Jobson has 20 days to file a statement of defence and/or a counter-suit.
While the lawsuit's timing might seem insensitive, it could be a function of regulation: Any lawsuit claiming wrongdoing in a death must be filed within two years of that fatality.
CN Rail, which operates one of North America's largest rail networks, reported almost $10 billion in revenue last year.
Damages Via's train incurred -- the passenger line operates on CN tracks -- or injuries to its passengers, aren't included in the lawsuit.

Mom hit with lawsuit near anniversary of son's death in train collision | Ontario | News | Toronto Sun
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
Are you fricken kidding me. Whomever approved this lawsuit needs to lose their job. The guy is dead and at 22 likely had no assets worth anything. It would certainly appear that someone at CN is pissed they have to spend $400k to make their crossing safe, like it's a hardship to make it safe, and see her as the cause so want to punish her.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Are you fricken kidding me. Whomever approved this lawsuit needs to lose their job. The guy is dead and at 22 likely had no assets worth anything. It would certainly appear that someone at CN is pissed they have to spend $400k to make their crossing safe, like it's a hardship to make it safe, and see her as the cause so want to punish her.


He probably had insurance. That is what they would be going after.


She should counter sue, however, considering what the TSB found.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I'd definitely be counter-suing if I were her. There's no way he can be found to be wholly responsible given that the TSB notes non-standard warning signs and weed growth obscuring even that. There are so many really unsafe rail crossings, somethings got to be done to make them safer. It's not just the drivers but anyone on board of trains that can be injured or even die, so it's not enough to say the driver's should know enough to come to a full stop at all crossings.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
He probably had insurance. That is what they would be going after.


She should counter sue, however, considering what the TSB found.

Yeah, I think from what I read it was CN's fault and they don't have a leg to stand on. They probably know that also. Someone in the corp has decided to make this woman's life miserable because she has made them spend $400k and their bonus is smaller.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,617
2,365
113
Toronto, ON
This could be just a play in the legal chess game. Throw the other side off balance with an agressive stance. Perhaps there are some brownie points for hitting the courtroom first rather than be a countersuit. And maybe CN is just trying to prevent being named responsible for the VIA lawsuits which may be pending. This way they can say it was not our fault.

But it is insensitive but I am not sure I remember a lawyer or corporation ever being sensitive.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
This could be just a play in the legal chess game. Throw the other side off balance with an agressive stance. Perhaps there are some brownie points for hitting the courtroom first rather than be a countersuit. And maybe CN is just trying to prevent being named responsible for the VIA lawsuits which may be pending. This way they can say it was not our fault.

But it is insensitive but I am not sure I remember a lawyer or corporation ever being sensitive.

Sensitive, no. But they should be able to grasp the concept of bad PR.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
Sensitive, no. But they should be able to grasp the concept of bad PR.

The email I just sent them cancelling my planned trip on the Rocky Mountaineer might give them an idea...not that the exec who approved this lawsuit would notice or care.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
75
Eagle Creek
I agree that the mother should counter-sue CN. That said, I hope she has lots of friends with deep pockets because it isn't going to be cheap and could very well last for years.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
What a bunch of "richards'!

It looks like they are just POed they had to spend $400K so they are going after her because she was instrumental in bringing about those changes.

Unbelievable.

You know... men and women sat around the table and actually came to a decision to sue the mother of the victim.

I agree that the mother should counter-sue CN. That said, I hope she has lots of friends with deep pockets because it isn't going to be cheap and could very well last for years.


I wouldn't pay a dime in my defense of this. This could ruin her financially if she was to fight this.

I'm firing from the hip in this thread on emotion.

 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
What a bunch of "richards'!

It looks like they are just POed they had to spend $400K so they are going after her because she was instrumental in bringing about those changes.

Unbelievable.

You know... men and women sat around the table and actually came to a decision to sue the mother of the victim.



I wouldn't pay a dime in my defense of this. This could ruin her financially if she was to fight this.

I'm firing from the hip in this thread on emotion.

[/FONT]
I think I'd be inclined to represent myself and invite all sorts of press to the party.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
maybe I am reading into the article but it didn't seem as though she was going to sue them at all, it appeared as though all she wanted was for warning signs etc to be clear...thus I am baffled by them doing this... usually companies try to limit bad press, so either there is more to the story or someone is going to get fired for sheer stupidity
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
What a bunch of "richards'!

It looks like they are just POed they had to spend $400K so they are going after her because she was instrumental in bringing about those changes.

Or as a pre-emptive strike against the possible future lawsuits from the passengers on the Via Train against CN. You know, to establish fault on the part of the driver to hopefully offset their own culpability. Still slimey though, extremely slimey.


I wouldn't pay a dime in my defense of this. This could ruin her financially if she was to fight this.

Sadly does she even really have a choice?


I think I'd be inclined to represent myself and invite all sorts of press to the party.

I'd being giving daily press conferences because that will hit them where it hurts.


 

BruSan

Electoral Member
Jul 5, 2011
416
0
16
Let's see if I've got this correct;

There is a two year limit imposed on filing suit in cases of death incurred.

The woman has refused and indicated her reasoning as to why on a number of occasions that she had no intention of suing and was only interested in improving the safety of the crossing for others.

In anticipation of that two year limit arriving a boardroom meeting of idiots decided to pre-empt her perhaps, maybe, possibly changing her mind by suing her, thus veritably FORCING her to counter sue.

Are they out of their friggin minds? The two year limit was about to expire and they would have ridden off into the sunset scott free except for an improvement they're going to write off as a capital expenditure in any case. Now they run the very real risk of having a sympathetic judiciary nail their freak'n hides to the wall.

Morons are running the railroads; wonderful news!
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
There are some critical elements that are missing from the information that has been released to the public on this story.

It makes no sense whatsoever that CN, a company that had 16 billion in revenues last year alone, would launch a suit for a mere $400k to 'recoup' losses in light of all of the bad press they will sustain over this.

There's some mechanism operating in the background that forced their hand, likely to do with establishing culpability and defining responsibility.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
What a bunch of "richards'!

It looks like they are just POed they had to spend $400K so they are going after her because she was instrumental in bringing about those changes.

Unbelievable.

You know... men and women sat around the table and actually came to a decision to sue the mother of the victim.



I wouldn't pay a dime in my defense of this. This could ruin her financially if she was to fight this.

I'm firing from the hip in this thread on emotion.

[/FONT]

"Richards"?????????? Are those dignified d*cks?
 

bobnoorduyn

Council Member
Nov 26, 2008
2,262
28
48
Mountain Veiw County
I'm not sure how this can work out well for CN. To my knowledge the mother is the executrix, (the legal term being a woman, sounds archaic I know), who is responsible to her son's estate but whose liability is limited only to the assets of his estate. Being 22 years old, I'm sure his estate's assets are slim. Also, to my knowledge, insrance is dispersed to beneficiaries and is protected, even from the tax man. He was not a minor and she could be hardly be held responsible for his actions. Unless she was the owner of the truck I fail to see how they can successfully sue her for anything. I'm no solicitor, but my wife was the executrix of her mother's estate as was informed that her personal liability didn't extend beyond her mom's estate's assets, and life insurance payouts are not part of the estate.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
I spoke with a friend who is a lawyer about this story. Her opinion is the same as some others have already mentioned. CN is trying to move culpability to the young man so as to avoid paying millions in damages to the passengers.