PHILADELPHIA – In its response to wrongful death litigation, Amtrak has denied responsibility for the deaths of two minor children from Chester, who were killed in April by a passing Amtrak train going from New York to Washington, D.C.
Siana Gordon (Administratrix of the Estate of Jahaad Atkinson, a minor) and Wydeia Kimble (Administratrix of the Estate of Ah’yir Womack, a minor) both of Chester, first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on July 27 versus National Railroad Passenger Corporation, of Washington, D.C.
“Amtrak owns railroad lines in the eastern United States that are enclosed by fencing. Amtrak is responsible for building, repairing, and maintaining said fencing. On or about April 29, 2023, there was a gaping hole in the fencing protecting the track at the location of Central and Tilghman Streets in Chester, Pennsylvania,” the suit said.
“It is common practice for children to walk through said hole in the fence adjacent to the railroad in order to gain access to the nearby playground at Memorial Park. On April 29, 2023, five to seven children, including Jahaad and Ah’yir, walked through said hole onto the tracks. On April 29, 2023, at approximately 4:30 p.m., Amtrak Train 161, going from New York to Washington D.C., struck and killed Jahaad and Ah’yir. Amtrak is in possession of video that allegedly captured Jahaad and Ah’yir being struck by Train 161.”
The suit added that same video illustrates that Jahaad and Ah’yir were “dragged by the Amtrak train and did not die instantaneously.”
“It is alleged, and therefore averred that Amtrak knew or had reason to know, that children and adults were likely to trespass on the train tracks in this area of its land because they erected fencing which would prevent children from walking onto the tracks. Thus, trespassers were anticipated. Amtrak, as a possessor of the land on which the incident took place, owed Jahaad and Ah’yir, minors, a duty of care to avoid serious bodily injury or death,” the suit stated.
“It is also alleged and therefore averred that Amtrak knew or should have known that a complete, well-maintained fence was necessary to prevent children from trespassing on its train tracks. As such, Amtrak knew or should have known that lack of such a fence would pose an unreasonable risk of death and/or a serious bodily injury to those children. It is also alleged and therefore averred that Jahaad and Ah’yir, because of their youth, neither discovered the dangerous condition, nor realized and/or appreciated the serious risk of death or bodily injury involved in crossing Amtrak's train tracks. It is also alleged and therefore averred that Amtrak failed to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger and risk of death and serious bodily injury or otherwise protect children from this danger.”
UPDATE
In a Sept. 15 answer to the complaint, Amtrak denied its substantive allegations and provided 16 separate affirmative defenses.
“Plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Any claims which plaintiffs may have against Amtrak may be barred, or alternatively, reduced by virtue of the doctrine of comparative negligence and/or contributory negligence, pursuant to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. Plaintiffs’ claims may be limited or precluded by federal and/or state law. The injuries and damages alleged in the complaint were due to, and proximately caused by, plaintiffs’ and/or decedents’ own negligence, carelessness, recklessness, willfulness and/or wantonness. To the extent plaintiffs’ decedents assumed the risk of which they now complain, they should be barred from recovery. There is no basis to support a claim for punitive damages, as Amtrak did not act outrageously, with evil motive, with reckless indifference or in any manner giving rise to claim for punitive damages. Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages violates the United States Constitution and/or Pennsylvania Constitution. To the extent any claims against Amtrak are inconsistent with federal or state law, statutes or regulations, or any rules or regulations issued by the Federal Railroad Administration, same are preempted, precluded, or otherwise limited,” the defenses said.
“Plaintiffs’ decedents were trespassing at the time of the incident at issue. Amtrak owed no duty to plaintiffs’ decedents, except to refrain from causing injury through willful or wanton misconduct. Amtrak had no duty to erect or maintain fencing along its tracks. Any alleged lack of fencing or lack of maintenance of fencing is not the proximate cause of plaintiffs’ or decedents’ injuries and/or damages. Amtrak did not breach any alleged duty to plaintiffs or decedents. Amtrak did not commit willful or wanton misconduct towards the decedents at the time of the incident set forth in the complaint. Plaintiffs’ decedents’ negligent, willful, wanton, and/or reckless conduct bars plaintiffs’ ability to recover damages for the injuries and damages claimed in the complaint. Any claims which plaintiffs may have against the answering defendant are barred, or alternatively, must be reduced by virtue of the Railroad Civil Immunity Act.”
For counts of negligence, survival and wrongful death, the plaintiffs are seeking compensatory damages and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs including reasonable attorney’s fees, any and all relief to which the plaintiffs may be entitled and a trial by jury.
The plaintiffs are represented by Emeka Igwe of The Igwe Firm, in Philadelphia.
The defendant is represented by Christopher Scott Sheldon and Yuri J. Brunetti of Landman Corsi Ballaine & Ford, also in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-02884
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com