 |
Re: Metrolink and tax payers pay $30 million for Glendale wreck
Author: no-name
Date: 10-14-2009 - 18:55
The last sentence in the article is a hint:
"Attorneys shifted their attention on testimony by a train engineer that raised question [sic] about the train's braking system."
It's apparent that the plaintiffs' lawyers convinced Metrolink that they could persuade a jury that Metrolink had some liability. A jury trial would cost Metrolink considerably more, both defending itself and in damages. It's called cutting your losses.
"Attorneys shifted their attention on testimony by a train engineer that raised question [sic] about the train's braking system."
It's apparent that the plaintiffs' lawyers convinced Metrolink that they could persuade a jury that Metrolink had some liability. A jury trial would cost Metrolink considerably more, both defending itself and in damages. It's called cutting your losses.
