Case Title: Mobbs v. Central VT Railway

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1989-04-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40
as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
Court, 111 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 of any errors in order
that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.


                                No. 86-255


Ricky L. Mobbs, et al.                       Supreme Court

         v.                                  On Appeal from
                                             Chittenden Superior Court
Central Vermont Railway, Inc.
                                             April Term, 1989


Hilton H. Dier, Jr., J.

Kohn & Rath, Hinesburg, for plaintiffs-appellants

Robert B. Hemley and Dennis R. Pearson of Gravel & Shea, Burlington, for
  defendant-appellee


PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Peck, Gibson, and Dooley, JJ., and Barney, C.J.
          (Ret.), Specially Assigned


     GIBSON, J.   This appeal stems from a fatal train-car collision in
which three of the car's occupants were killed and the other two seriously
injured.  Plaintiffs, the two surviving passengers and the estates of two of
the decedents, appeal a jury verdict finding that defendant Central Vermont
Railway, Inc. (CVR) was negligent but that CVR's negligence was not a
proximate cause of plaintiffs' injuries.  We affirm.
                                    I.
                                    A.
     At approximately noon on February 4, 1978, David Mobbs drove his car
into the path of an oncoming train at the Jonesville railway crossing.  Mr.
Mobbs, his wife, Sandra, and their two-month-old baby, Danielle, were
killed, while the couple's two-year-old son, Christopher, and Mr. Mobbs'
sixteen-year-old brother, Ricky, survived.  Apparently, Mr. Mobbs was
unaware of the oncoming train despite the fact that he was familiar with the
crossing, the red warning lights at the crossing were flashing, the warning
bells were ringing, the train's horn had been blown according to
regulations, and the train's headlights were on.  There was no gate at the
crossing.  Mr. Mobbs had turned off Route 2 onto a smaller road and
continued at a moderate speed for fifty feet until he reached the tracks
where the train struck his car.  The car windows were rolled up and the
heater was turned on because it was very cold.  The ground was snow-covered,
the sky was clear, and the sun, being in its winter arc, was low in the
southern sky, the direction in which the Mobbs' car was headed when it was
struck.
                                    B.
     Separate actions were filed in 1980 by or on behalf of the five
occupants of the car.  Despite plaintiffs' numerous objections, the four
passenger cases were consolidated and then joined for trial with the
driver's case.  The two-week trial took place in October of 1985.  At the
close of plaintiffs' direct case, the trial court  granted CVR's motion for
a directed verdict in the case of Danielle Mobbs, based on its conclusion
that the Wrongful Death Act did not contemplate recovery for pecuniary loss
suffered by a sibling or for loss of "love and companionship" between
siblings.  Although the trial court incorrectly construed the statute as
foreclosing recovery by Danielle's brother for pecuniary injuries, we
affirmed the directed verdict because of the complete lack of evidence of
any pecuniary injury suffered by Danielle's brother as a result of
Danielle's death.  See Mobbs v. Vermont Central Ry., 150 Vt. 311,