USE OF CIVIL LIABILITY TO AID CRIME VICTIMS

• NCJ Number: 56845
• Journal: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 70 Issue: 1 Dated: (SPRING 1979) Pages: 57-62
• Author(s): ANON
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 6 pages
• Corporate Author: Northwestern University; Williams and Wilkins Co
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

SEVERAL SUCCESSFUL SUITS AGAINST COMMON CARRIERS FOR DAMAGES SUFFERED AS THE RESULT OF THE CRIMINAL ACTION OF A THIRD PARTY ARE REVIEWED. THESE SUITS HAVE ESTABLISHED THE OBLIGATON OF CARRIERS TO PROTECT PASSENGERS.

Abstract

THE FAILURE OF STATE-FUNDED COMPENSATION PROGRAMS AND INSURANCE PLANS TO COMPENSATE VICTIMS OF CRIME FOR LOSSES SUFFERED HAS LED TO INCREASING USE OF CIVIL LIABILITY SUITS. IN KENNY V. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATON AUTHORITY, A WOMAN WHO WAS RAPED IN A TRANSIT STATION SUCCESSFULLY SUED THE CARRIER FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PLATFORM SECURITY. THIS CASE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL APPEALS. KENNY WAS UPHELD AND THE COURTS MAINTAINED THAT A COMMON CARRIER HAS AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE REASONABLE PROTECTION FOR PASSENGERS. IN MCCOY V. CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY, A MAN WHO WAS ASSAULTED BY A FELLOW PASSENGER WON HIS CASE AGAINST THE COMPANY. THE COURT NOTED THAT THE CONDUCTOR FAILED TO COME TO THE PASSENGER'S AID WHEN THREE LOUD AND UNRULY MEN BEGAN BOTHERING THE VICTIM. IN MACPHERSON V. TAMIAMI TRAIL TOURS AND IN SMITH V. WEST SUBURBAN LINES, PASSENGERS SUCCESSFULLY SUED FOR DAMAGES WHEN BUS DRIVERS FAILED TO PROTECT THEM FROM FELLOW PASSENGERS, WHILE WATSON V. ADIRONDACK TRAILWAYS EXTENDED THIS OBLIGATION TO PROTECT PASSENGERS TO THE TRANSIT TERMINAL PARKING LOT. HOWEVER, IN MORRIS V. CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY, THE CARRIER WAS NOT HELD LIABLE FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY A BRICK THROWN THROUGH THE BUS WINDOW; IT WAS STATED THAT THE BUS COMPANY COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE FORESEEN THE INCIDENT. SEVERAL OTHER CASES LIMITING A CARRIER'S LIABILITY WHEN THE INCIDENT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED ARE REVIEWED. IN A FINAL CASE, HANBACK V. SEABOARD COASTLINE RAILROAD, A RAPE VICTIM WAS ABLE TO RECOVER WHEN A TRAIN EMPLOYEE FAILED TO RESPOND TO HER SCREAMS. THE SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS WHICH MUST BE PROVED IN SUCH A VICTIM SUIT ARE BRIEFLY REVIEWED. FOOTNOTES CONTAIN REFERENCES. (GLR)