On March 4, 1996, an 81-car Wisconsin Central train derailed traveling through Weyauwega, Wisconsin. This action was commenced on behalf of 31 residents of Weyauwega, dissatisfied with settlement offers extended by the railroad in the claims process. The case was bifurcated for separate trials on issues of liability and damages. On motion the court dismissed plaintiff's claim for strict liability for an ultra hazardous activity and nuisance. Pretrial the court also held that, as a matter of federal preemption, several of plaintiffs' negligence theories could not be prosecuted. Thus, at the liability trial, the issues presented were whether the railroad was negligent in maintenance of the switch that failed; whether the railroad was negligent in its training of track inspectors; and whether the railroad violated §195.35, Wis. Stats., thereby entitling plaintiff's to recover damages. The parties agreed the Weyauwega derailment occurred because of a fractured heel block, which propagated through several bolt holes. The lock bar maintains the integrity of the switch by preventing bolts from turning. Although federal regulations do not directly require the replacement of a broken lock bar, Wisconsin Central's internal standards required its track inspectors to immediately repair or replace any broken switch parts.
The evidence adduced at trial established that the lock bar on the switch in question had been missing for at least a year prior to the derailment, that track inspectors were required to visually inspect the switch at least twice a month, and that a visual inspection would easily have revealed the missing lock bar. Plaintiff's presented expert testimony that the bolts in the switch were loose as a result of the missing lock bar and that missing and loose bolts violated federal railroad standards and caused the fracture to develop. Testimony of plaintiff's expert also showed that a reasonable track inspector, upon finding the broken lock bar, would have pulled apart the switch to inspect it. Defendant contended the fracture was not detectable by a track inspector exercising reasonable care and that it was a hidden defect that manifested itself for the first time on March 4, 1996 when the train derailed. The trail court judge ruled that the issue of treble damages would go to the jury and the case settled on a confidential basis prior to closing arguments. Plaintiff's experts: Guy Western, track inspector, Gordon Ingles, railroad management.
Amy Bekx, et al, v. Wisconsin Central, Ltd., Case No. 96-CV-119, Waupaca County Circuit Court. Plaintiff was represented by John C. Cabaniss of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.