Harry 1,088 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #1 Posted July 22, 2010 The widow of a track worker electrocuted on a third rail in Queens is set to file a $50 million wrongful death suit against the city, the Daily News has learned. Jackie Knell will file a notice to sue today, charging there were numerous violations at the work site April 26, when her husband slipped and fell. Lawyer Sanford Rubenstein said the "third-rail protecting boards were removed and there was no signage or lights alerting employees of the exposed third rail." The News reported last month that a preliminary investigation of the tragedy raised a number of safety concerns, including that Knell was lugging 90 pounds of spikes when he apparently lost his balance. A spokeswoman for NYC Transit declined to comment. From: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2010/07/22/2010-07-22_track_workers_death_will_spur_50m_suit.html#ixzz0uPpvFzWO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan 2,005 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #2 Posted July 22, 2010 The widow of a track worker electrocuted on a third rail in Queens is set to file a $50 million wrongful death suit against the city, the Daily News has learned. Jackie Knell will file a notice to sue today, charging there were numerous violations at the work site April 26, when her husband slipped and fell. Lawyer Sanford Rubenstein said the "third-rail protecting boards were removed and there was no signage or lights alerting employees of the exposed third rail." The News reported last month that a preliminary investigation of the tragedy raised a number of safety concerns, including that Knell was lugging 90 pounds of spikes when he apparently lost his balance. A spokeswoman for NYC Transit declined to comment. From: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2010/07/22/2010-07-22_track_workers_death_will_spur_50m_suit.html#ixzz0uPpvFzWO How can she sue the City when the death occured on property? Can you say 3.00 bucks for the fare now? They are gonna blame the lawsuit for the next round of fare hikes since they are running out of people to blame(other than poor managament of their own money). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aahd 0 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #3 Posted July 22, 2010 how did that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express 292 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #4 Posted July 22, 2010 It was raining, the guy was working on the track without a third rail cover, he slipped, fell, and got electrocuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdi919 2 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #5 Posted July 22, 2010 its sad to say but will put it on him since he was the supervisior in charge. they will say he let those violations occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider 2,270 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #6 Posted July 22, 2010 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iGeMiNix 22 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #7 Posted July 22, 2010 It was raining, the guy was working on the track without a third rail cover, he slipped, fell, and got electrocuted. That sucks hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular 771 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #8 Posted July 22, 2010 There's too many damn loopholes in the system! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 79 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #9 Posted July 22, 2010 its sad to say but will put it on him since he was the supervisior in charge. they will say he let those violations occur. True, however I still see the settling out of court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex L. 3 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #10 Posted July 22, 2010 How can she sue the City when the death occured on property/ The subway is owned by the City of New York and operated by MTA-NYC Transit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express 292 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #11 Posted July 22, 2010 True, however I still see the settling out of court. ...and then raising the fare again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeesPwnMets 569 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #12 Posted July 22, 2010 I dont support this lawsuit. He was the supervisor, he should have told workers to cover the 3rd rail, and it was in heavy rain. He and his guys should have never been working in that pouring rain. He should have pulled the workers, and all work should have been suspended on elevated portions of the subway that night. Im sorry, but I don't think suing the city is the right thing here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express 292 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #13 Posted July 22, 2010 I dont support this lawsuit. He was the supervisor, he should have told workers to cover the 3rd rail, and it was in heavy rain. He and his guys should have never been working in that pouring rain. He should have pulled the workers, and all work should have been suspended on elevated portions of the subway that night. Im sorry, but I don't think suing the city is the right thing here Agreed. In addition, it's only contributing to the bad economic situation of the city and MTA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeesPwnMets 569 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #14 Posted July 22, 2010 Agreed. In addition, it's only contributing to the bad economic situation of the city and MTA. IMHO, people who do this are just looking to get rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NX Express 292 Posted July 22, 2010 Share #15 Posted July 22, 2010 IMHO, people who do this are just looking to get rich That's what too many people in this country are trying to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Messino 1 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #16 Posted July 23, 2010 fact of the matter is, no one was there except for the guy who died and who ever else was left on the job at the time so pointing fingers of blame wont get much.. But the evidence is against the dead man just because he was the supervisor and should have known better. As for covering the 3rd rail. I dont think it would have mattered much since he was juggling around heavy steel in the rain, so when he fell all his weight came crashing down on the 3rd rail. He was bound to get electrocuted whether it was covered or not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe 781 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #17 Posted July 23, 2010 fact of the matter is, no one was there except for the guy who died and who ever else was left on the job at the time so pointing fingers of blame wont get much.. But the evidence is against the dead man just because he was the supervisor and should have known better. When all else fails, "blame the dead guy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse 2,690 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #18 Posted July 23, 2010 Could always 'blame it as an act of God' since the lightning/rain is a natural occurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry 1,088 Posted July 23, 2010 Author Share #19 Posted July 23, 2010 How can she sue the City when the death occured on property? Can you say 3.00 bucks for the fare now? They are gonna blame the lawsuit for the next round of fare hikes since they are running out of people to blame(other than poor managament of their own money). The fare will go up again, and again, and again regardless of this terrible tragedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 79 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #20 Posted July 23, 2010 Could always 'blame it as an act of God' since the lightning/rain is a natural occurrence. True, however god endows us with the gift of knowledge (in theory). A supervisor who knows he has to carry heavy equipment in the rain should know that he should be extra careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse 2,690 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #21 Posted July 23, 2010 My post was meant as sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 79 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #22 Posted July 23, 2010 My post was meant as sarcasm. And you notice the in theory part was in bold. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtype3995 1 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #23 Posted July 23, 2010 the responses in here are pretty surprising.....so because he's a supervisor he should know better? do some of you realize that sometimes the 3rd rail protection boards are sometimes not in in place due to possible work on the area(an example was union sq about a month or 2 ago).......in fact trains were allowed through the area without the boards(no track personnel were present) i dont think this lady is looking to get rich......she lost her husband in a tragic accident, and i think this lady would rather have her husband than the money....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTOMan 2,005 Posted July 23, 2010 Share #24 Posted July 23, 2010 The fare will go up again, and again, and again regardless of this terrible tragedy. The fare part was sarcasm Harry.. Its stil a darn shame, shows people how dangerous this job can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.