Bill,
That may be an interesting question. AFIK the FRA does not recognize
whistling restrictions as valid Railroad Operating practices.
For example La Crosse actually did pass an ordinance but the BN did
not observe it and I doubt the BNSF has.
>From my point of view in a legal sense the municipality involved would
be culpable here and the railroad should just wash their hands of it.
Russ
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Barber" <clipperw@E...>
To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 January, 2003 09:30
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Digest Number 1578
> John,
>
> I appreciate the comments. From a sound warning standpoint, what
> happens in those areas where whistles are restricted, such as the
> Chicago commuter territory. Unless a clear and present danger is
> apparent, the engineer would not normally sound the horn.
>
> Bill Barber
>
> On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 05:16 AM, BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
> wrote:
>
> > Message: 8
> > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:40:10 -0800 (PST)
> > From: "John D. Mitchell, Jr." <cbqrr47@y...>
> > Subject: Re: Digest Number 1577
> >
> > They may win at trial, but on appeal they usually
> > lose, at least in the State of Illinois. Here the law
> > is clear, the train has the right of way. Now if the
> > rr does not sound a warning, the signals are not
> > working, or the view is obsructed, the motorist MAY
> > win. Just observations from a country lawyer!
> > John D. Mitchell, Jr.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
|