Train Lawsuit: Elm Grove man sues tra...

Train Lawsuit: Elm Grove man sues train company after their tra...

There are 31 comments on the Fox6 story from Mar 29, 2010, titled Train Lawsuit: Elm Grove man sues train company after their tra.... In it, Fox6 reports that:

A man severely injured in a Memorial Day train crash says the train company should pay his medical bills, but some say the company isn't the only one at fault.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fox6.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Waukesha, WI

#1 Mar 29, 2010
I think Canadian Pacific should sue Partenfelders for damages they caused to the train and the tracks, it is against the law to stop on the tracks and if she was paying attention she would have stopped where she was supposed to.
this is like spilling your coffee on yourself and then trying to sue Mcdonalds its your own fault deal with it

Milwaukee, WI

#2 Mar 29, 2010
While it is unfortunate what happened to the family why in the hell would you stop on train tracks!? I can't believe these people would have the audacity to profit off of their misfortune.
Blame it on everyone else

Sussex, WI

#3 Mar 29, 2010
What a bunch of idiots...Blame the railroad for yous stupidity of stopping on the tracks..You should just appreciate the fact that someone was there to get you and your idiotic family out of your van...Then to want to sue them. Maybe they should appreciate that they are still alive...Greedy idiots is all

Minneapolis, MN

#4 Mar 30, 2010
If you want to blame someone, blame your not so bright wife. No excuse, none... to cross over tracks when you can't clear it. NONE! You should divorce her for putting your child in danger like that. If you're so worried about neglect like you claim the train company was, then your wife should be looked into for her neglect. You make me sick, I hope they fight you even if if means costing them more not to settle. I hope and pray they dont give you a cent.
Get This


#5 Mar 30, 2010
Check out U-Tube and the video they are doing to endorse car seats! Nevermind the fact the child could have been killed. Anything to cash in right?

Milwaukee, WI

#6 Mar 30, 2010
Never stop on train tracks ever ! This is just stupidity on behalf of the wife for putting herself there. This is a family trying to make a profit now, Lesson learned don't do it ever again.

Watertown, WI

#7 Mar 30, 2010
How dumb can you be the stop on the tracks. Duh, if ur stuck I would say get out of ur vehicle. Cars can be replaced not family. Or perhaps it was family suicide.

Waterford, WI

#8 Mar 30, 2010
I am just amazed that some people in this world can not take responsibility for their own actions. Everyone is taught you do not stop on Rail road tracks anyway. What if this was an Amtrak Train. They go alot faster than CP does. Suck it up, and realize your wife made a mistake and live with it. Next time maybe you won't stop on RR Tracks. Learn something from it.
Co T

Milwaukee, WI

#9 Mar 30, 2010
Unbelievable - another example of not taking responsibility for one's actions. Did we all not learn to not cross a RR track when a train is coming? Or is it that the importance of where one person wants to be more important than anything or anyone else. After the health insurance mandate becomes law - there will be no more DEEP pockets left to sue - get your lawsuits filed now.

Milwaukee, WI

#10 Mar 30, 2010
autos broke the law.

Milwaukee, WI

#11 Mar 30, 2010
This mother is an awful mother, why on this earth would you stop on rail road tracks with your children in the car? She had to have a death wish, she should be brought up on attempted homicide charges.

Milwaukee, WI

#12 Mar 30, 2010
I have to agree with all of these comments. When are people going to be acountable for their own actions. What a waste of time and money in the court system. This family needs to suck it up and be held accountable. Maybe she needs to retake drivers education. You learn never to stop on railroad tracks. They should be thankfull.

Grafton, WI

#13 Mar 30, 2010
It is absolutely ridiculous that this person is suing the railroad company. It is unfortunate that people were hurt in this accident. However, I don't feel the railroad should be responsible at all. If a driver stops on railroad tracks they are responsible for their own actions. It's common sense not to do such a thing. The license of the driver should probably be revoked due to the poor judgment of stopping on the tracks, which resulted in serious injury of a police officer. Also, if I were the railroad company I would counter sue this person for the lawyer fees and damages they caused. Does this mean the city can now sue this individual for their medical costs??? You cannot possibly break the law and then claim negligence on the other party. If you could the courts would be flooded with five times as many cases.
Child Advocate

Milwaukee, WI

#14 Mar 30, 2010
The real victim as I see it is the Police Officer that to this day is dealing with pain related to this incident. Who by the way, won't get anything out of this lawsuit for his pain and suffering. He tried to save someone and went above and beyond the call of duty.
The woman driving the van was totally irresponsible, and should get NOTHING. Under NO circumstances should anyone, ever, be parked on railroad tracks in their car...that is beyond dumb. She put herself in harm's way, and her husband got injured trying to save her and their innocent child.
I hope the railroad fights this on principle alone. The woman's husband who is suing is blaming the wrong person. If you want to play the blame game, wasn't he also at fault for having his car in front of her's and boxing her in knowing a train might be coming at any time? The only one at fault here is his wife...period.
Where is personal responsibility today??????????

Milwaukee, WI

#15 Mar 30, 2010
This is soooo ridiculous. Why would the train company be liable for stupidity on the womens part.. Who in their right mind turn around on a train track anyway. These people need to own up to their errors and take responsibility for making a bad decision.

Saint Marys, GA

#16 Mar 30, 2010
They don't know if they had health insurance before the crash? How could you not know that, especially after such an incident?
I agree with the comments posted so far.. the woman was highly negligent and in a perfect world would be brought up on child endangerment charges.

Waldo, WI

#18 Mar 30, 2010
why in gods name would anyone stop on a railroad track with or without a child in the car...
Jury why

Thiensville, WI

#19 Mar 30, 2010
Hopefully if this even makes it to a jury trial, the people that have commented so far are on it. No need for sympathy, just the facts. You stopped on the tracks and got a ticket for doing so! Own up to your own mistake.
By the way, is your husband suing you?

Cedarburg, WI

#20 Mar 30, 2010
The injuries from this incident will affect all, for years to come and that is a shame. But that being said the accident would have never have happened if this women would not have placed herself and her child in that situation. How is the railroad negligent in any way? This attorney Victor Harding needs to crawl back under the rock he came from. This is why we need tort reform!

Since: Nov 09

United States

#21 Mar 30, 2010
I decided to do a little research before I made a comment (and all who posted before me you are going to love this). First is an excert directly from the Wisconsin DMV drivers handbook....

"Railroad Crossing Warning Signs. Many railroad crossings have signs or signals to warn you that a train is near. Never try to beat a train across the tracks. Never start to cross railroad tracks if you will have to stop on the tracks because there isn’t room for your vehicle on the far side. It is wise not to shift gears when crossing railroad tracks, just in case your vehicle might stall. Remember… trains are large and may be moving faster than they seem."

So, ummmmmm, yeah, I don't think someone read their handbook.
The second thing is that a train going 55mph needs about a mile and a half to stop and, at 27mph (which is half of 55, for thoes keeping track)it still takes about three quarters mile to stop. Now take into account the stopping distance for speed the lawyer thinks the train should have been going (20 mph) and equation above and the train would still need about a half mile to stop...Now (if the video is correct) there is a bend in the tracks before the crossing and if the train was suppose to be going the lawyer's speed it would have still hit the car. Train conductors can't see arround corners, and PEOPLE ARE NOT TO STOP ON TRAIN TRACKS!
Kick their butts in court Canadian Pacific!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Milwaukee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New "Chillwaukee" shirts on 22 hr bstees 1
Remember the Alamo Nov 13 John Whang 3
Democrats seize control of Wisconsin Nov 10 Bill 3
why is attorney kevin p. sullivan still assista... Nov 9 leprechans 1
News Businesses and communities suffering after ICE ... Nov 5 Billfartbotanical 55
News Walker: Obama is 'the biggest liar in the world' Nov 5 Impeach the Creep 2
What is the Secret White House Waiver that was ... Nov 5 Abraham 1

Milwaukee Jobs

Personal Finance

Milwaukee Mortgages