Insurer sues Fort Worth Transportation Authority over pedestrian's death

[TexasTowelie]

FORT WORTH -- An insurance company sued the Fort Worth Transportation Authority on Friday over the 2010 death of a Haltom City woman who was struck and killed by a bus in downtown Fort Worth.

New Hampshire Insurance Co. seeks unspecified damages from the T and bus driver LeShawn Renea Vaughan. The company says in its lawsuit that it has paid "substantial" workers' compensation death benefits to the family of Judith Peterson, 61, an employee of XTO Energy who was struck by a Route 6 bus on July 27, 2010, as she crossed Houston Street.

"The T was negligent in entrusting its vehicle to a reckless and incompetent driver," says the lawsuit, which was filed in state district court in Tarrant County.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/02/24/3761325/insurer-sues-fort-worth-transportation.html#my-headlines-default#storylink=cpy

[font color=green]Note: While it is normal for insurance companies to file claims for subrogation, it should also be noted that New Hampshire Insurance Company is a subsidiary of AIG. While the circumstances are tragic, the linked article indicates that the woman was struck while entering a crosswalk while the signals indicated "Don't Walk". It takes some audacity for a conglomerate that already received billions from taxpayers to sue a quasi-governmental agency and use the civil justice system for recovery when the deceased was clearly at fault.

It should be interesting to see what evidence that New Hampshire Ins. Co. offers as to its allegations that the bus driver was reckless and incompetent.

Most likely this is a waste of taxpayer money on multiple levels.[/font]

[bahrbearian]

1. By New Hampshire Insurance Co. standards they could

sue the Dept. of licensing for giving the driver a license, or the school system that taught the driver ect ect

[man4allcats]

2. I have a part-time job driving a shuttle bus in Houston's Texas Medical Center

because I'm over 50 and can't seem to find a decent job in the field I was trained and worked in (molecular biology research tech) for more than 16 years. As a bus driver, I see this sort of carelessness by pedestrians on a daily basis. By way of example, not too long ago I saw a med school professor whom I recognized and whom I personally know to be an arrogant, narcissistic jerk walking down the center line of a busy street in the Med Center in heavy traffic. He was so full of himself he never even bothered to look over his shoulder to see the cars and buses (one of them mine) approaching him from behind. He merely continued walking only raising his right arm with hand up and elbow bent at 90 degrees as if to say "Don't run into me - you know I'm god almighty so you'd better not." The bus drivers I know and work with are skilled professionals working under difficult job conditions, and yet they maintain their professionalism under even the most trying circumstances. Professional drivers can and do make mistakes, but in the vast majority of cases they can drive circles around almost every other driver on the road. Condolences to the family of the woman killed, of course. Apparently she made a tragic mistake (after all, she was in the crosswalk when she should not have been) that cost her her life. Nevertheless, while I don't know the background of the particular driver named in this suit, I certainly wouldn't be willing to blindly accept the lawsuit's contention that she is "a reckless and incompetent driver." This sounds more like typical AIG bullshit to me. Mere contention by them that she is reckless is not sufficient. If I'm on the jury, they're gonna have to come up with some pretty rigorous proof.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

3. The deceased is guilty of contributory negligence, but it was also not all her fault.

Percentages of negligence can be apportioned by a civil jury.

[TexasTowelie]

4. Texas uses a modified comparative fault system using the 51% fault rule.

If the injured party was 50% or less at fault, he or she may still recover damages. In other words, a plaintiff may have caused half of the accident and still recover damages from the court, but if it is found that the plaintiff’s fault was responsible for more than half of the accident, that plaintiff is barred from receiving any damages determined by the court. Here, as in a pure comparative negligence state, a plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by the degree of his or her fault.

The newspaper article does mention something about traffic being re-routed, but I doubt that the transportation authority was involved with those decisions. Unless I am missing something at this late hour, it seems like the city should be a party to the lawsuit rather than the transportation authority. Of course, there is always a risk when a jury determines fault so a subrogation payment may occur on the claim for the nuisance value.