Pecos, Texas Train-Truck Collision: Your Legal Rights After the Union Pacific Crash That Killed Two Railroad Workers
The phone call came on a Wednesday in December. Your husband, your father, your son went to work for the railroad that morning the way he had a thousand mornings before, and this time he did not come home. A tractor-trailer hauling heavy equipment through the Permian Basin sat stopped on the railway crossing in Pecos for about a minute — long enough for the Union Pacific train crew to see it, slam the emergency brakes, and know that sixty-eight miles an hour was not going to be enough. Two railroad employees died. Three people in a building nearby were hurt. And in the hours since, the National Transportation Safety Board has recovered the train’s data recorder and opened an investigation that will take months to complete — while the evidence that decides who pays for this, and how much, is already beginning to disappear.
We are Attorney911, The Manginello Law Firm. We handle wrongful death and catastrophic commercial-vehicle cases in Texas. This page is for the families of the two Union Pacific employees who were killed, for the people who were inside the Chamber of Commerce building when the heavy equipment came through the wall, and for anyone who needs to understand what the law actually says when a commercial truck stalls on a railway crossing and a train cannot stop. Everything here is legal information, not legal advice. Contacting us is free and confidential. And we do not get paid unless we win your case.
What Happened in Pecos: The Collision and Its Aftermath
On December 18, 2024, a Union Pacific freight train traveling approximately 68 miles per hour collided with a tractor-trailer hauling heavy equipment at a railway crossing in Pecos, Reeves County, Texas. The National Transportation Safety Board has reported that the tractor-trailer was on the tracks for about a minute before the collision. The train crew applied emergency brakes before impact but could not prevent the crash.
The collision derailed the train. The heavy equipment the truck was carrying was propelled airborne into the nearby Chamber of Commerce building, damaging the structure and injuring people inside. Two Union Pacific railroad employees were killed. Three people sustained injuries that the Pecos police chief described as minor.
The NTSB has recovered a data recorder from the wreckage and transported it to its laboratory for analysis. A preliminary report is expected within weeks. A final report may take one to two years. But the NTSB’s investigation is not a substitute for a private forensic investigation — and the evidence that determines civil liability is on a clock measured in days and weeks, not years.
Pecos sits along Interstate 20 in far West Texas, about 200 miles east of El Paso, at the western edge of the Permian Basin — one of the most active oil and gas production regions in North America. That geography matters. This region generates extraordinary volumes of heavy-equipment, flatbed, and oilfield-services truck traffic, much of it crossing rural rail lines that intersect farm-to-market and industrial access roads. The Union Pacific line through Pecos is part of a major freight corridor carrying substantial train traffic at significant speeds. The specific crossing involved — whether it had active gates, flashing lights, and bells, or only passive crossbuck signs — will be one of the most critical questions in determining who bears responsibility for two deaths.
Two Roads to Accountability: FELA and Third-Party Negligence
Here is something most families do not learn until it is almost too late: the families of the two Union Pacific employees who were killed may have two legally distinct paths to recovery, not one. Each runs under a different law, in a different courthouse, with a different standard of proof and a different deadline.
The first path is a claim under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, known as FELA — a federal statute that has governed railroad-worker injury and death claims for more than a century. This is a claim against Union Pacific itself, the employer. It is not workers’ compensation. It is a fault-based tort claim that requires proof of the railroad’s negligence — but the threshold for that proof is the lowest in American injury law.
The second path is a third-party negligence claim against the tractor-trailer’s operating carrier, the driver, the heavy-equipment shipper or loader, and potentially the entity responsible for the grade crossing’s design and maintenance. This claim runs under Texas negligence law, with its own comparative-fault rules and damage framework.
These two paths are not mutually exclusive. A family can pursue both. And the strategic advantage of running them in parallel — or in separate courthouses — is one of the most powerful tools available to the families of railroad workers killed in grade-crossing collisions.
FELA: The Federal Law That Protects Railroad Workers’ Families
Railroad employees are not covered by state workers’ compensation. Congress built a separate, federal system for them more than a hundred years ago, and it is deliberately tilted in the worker’s favor. Understanding how FELA works is the foundation of everything that follows for the families of the two Union Pacific employees.
The Liability Standard: “In Whole or in Part”
The core of FELA is a single sentence that sets the lowest bar for employer liability in American law:
“Every common carrier by railroad engaging in commerce… shall be liable in damages to any person suffering injury while he is employed by such carrier… for such injury or death resulting in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the officers, agents, or employees of such carrier, or by reason of any defect or insufficiency, due to its negligence, in its cars, engines, appliances, machinery, track, roadbed, works, boats, wharves, or other equipment.”
That phrase — “in whole or in part” — is the entire engine of a FELA claim. The railroad does not have to be the primary cause of the worker’s death. It does not have to be the sole cause. It has to be one cause, even a slight one. The Supreme Court of the United States put it plainly: the test is whether the proofs justify the conclusion that “employer negligence played any part, even the slightest, in producing the injury or death.” That standard was set in 1957 and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court as recently as 2011.
For the families in Pecos, this means the question is not whether Union Pacific was solely responsible for the collision. The question is whether any railroad negligence — in the design of the crossing, in the speed the train traveled through it, in the adequacy of warning devices, in the maintenance of sight lines — played any part in the deaths. Even a small part is enough.
Defenses the Railroad Cannot Use
FELA strips away the defenses that employers raise in ordinary injury cases:
Contributory negligence does not bar recovery. Under FELA, even if the employee was partly at fault, the family can still recover — the award is simply reduced by the worker’s percentage of fault. And if the railroad violated a federal safety statute enacted for the protection of employees, the worker’s own contributory negligence is wiped out entirely. The damages are not reduced at all.
Assumption of risk is abolished. The railroad cannot defend itself by saying the job was dangerous and the worker knew it. Congress wrote that defense out of the law. A railroad cannot escape FELA liability by pointing to the obvious hazards of working on a train.
Any waiver or release is void. If a railroad claims agent pushes a document across a hospital table or a kitchen table and asks the family to sign it — a release, a settlement, a waiver — federal law makes that document legally worthless if its purpose was to exempt the railroad from liability. This is not a gray area. The statute says any such contract is void.
The Deadline: Three Years, Not Two
FELA gives the families three years from the date the cause of action accrued to file a lawsuit. This is longer than Texas’s general two-year statute of limitations for wrongful death, and it is a federal deadline that controls the FELA claim regardless of where the case is filed.
But three years can pass faster than anyone expects — and the evidence that proves the railroad’s negligence will not wait three years. The train’s event recorder data, the crossing signal logs, the crew’s hours-of-service records, the scene evidence — each of these has its own retention clock, and some of them are measured in days or months, not years.
The Venue Advantage: The Family Picks the Courthouse
FELA gives the plaintiff a choice that most state tort claims do not: the suit can be filed in any federal district where the defendant does business. Union Pacific operates across the western United States. This means the FELA claims may not have to be filed in Reeves County, which is a deeply conservative rural venue where jury awards can be more modest. The families may be able to file in a federal district with a more favorable jury pool — a strategic decision that an experienced railroad-litigation attorney makes early in the case.
Why the Tractor-Trailer Was on the Tracks: The Questions That Decide the Case
The NTSB has said the tractor-trailer was on the tracks for approximately one minute before the collision. One minute. Sixty seconds. The question that will define the trucking company’s liability is simple and devastating: why was a commercial vehicle carrying heavy equipment sitting on an active railway crossing for a full minute?
Every answer to that question leads to a different theory of negligence:
Mechanical failure. If the tractor-trailer stalled — a transmission failure, a brake lockup, a fuel system shutdown, an electrical fault — the question becomes whether the carrier maintained the vehicle in safe operating condition. A heavy-haul route through the Permian Basin demands sustained torque and braking performance. If the truck was not roadworthy, the carrier and any maintenance provider are responsible for putting a defective vehicle on a crossing it could not clear. The engine’s electronic control module stores fault codes that can reveal exactly what happened in the seconds before the stall — but that data must be preserved before the vehicle is serviced, scrapped, or the memory overwrites itself.
Driver error. If the driver misjudged the crossing geometry — the approach grade, the trailer clearance, the surface condition — and became high-centered or stuck, the question becomes whether the carrier trained and qualified this driver for heavy-haul operations. Federal regulations require motor carriers to maintain a driver qualification file documenting licensing, training, medical certification, and prior violations. If the driver was unqualified for the load or unfamiliar with the crossing, the carrier faces direct corporate liability independent of the driver’s individual mistake.
Cargo loading and securement. The heavy equipment was propelled airborne into a building. That fact raises an immediate question: did the cargo securement meet federal standards? The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations under 49 CFR Part 393 govern cargo securement — the number, type, and rating of chains, binders, and straps. If the securement failed on impact and allowed the equipment to become a projectile, the shipper and loader share responsibility for the injuries in the Chamber of Commerce building. If the load weight or distribution contributed to the stall — an overweight trailer struggling to clear a grade crossing — the loading analysis feeds back into the stall causation.
Route planning. If the carrier dispatched this driver through a crossing that was inadequate for a heavy-haul vehicle — a crossing with a steep approach grade, a tight turning radius, or a surface condition that could trap a low-clearance trailer — the dispatch decision itself is negligence. GPS telematics and dispatch records can show whether the carrier selected this route or whether the driver deviated from the assigned path.
Failure to notify. The tractor-trailer was on the tracks for approximately one minute. Federal regulations and railroad emergency protocols require immediate notification of railway authorities when a vehicle becomes stalled on a crossing. If the driver did not call 911, did not call the railroad’s emergency line, and did not attempt to alert the train — or if the carrier’s dispatch was notified and failed to act — that delay is its own act of negligence.
The NTSB Investigation: What It Can and Cannot Do for Your Case
The National Transportation Safety Board is the most respected investigative body in American transportation. Its investigators will examine the wreckage, download the train’s event recorder, measure the crossing geometry, review signal records, and interview witnesses. A preliminary report may arrive within weeks. A final report with a probable-cause determination may take one to two years.
But here is what the NTSB investigation is — and what it is not:
The NTSB is a fact-finding body. Its investigations are conducted for the purpose of preventing future accidents, not for assigning legal blame. Its own regulations state that its proceedings “are not conducted for the purpose of determining the rights, liabilities, or blame of any person or entity.” The NTSB determines probable cause for safety purposes.
And federal law keeps the NTSB’s conclusions out of the courtroom. No part of an NTSB report may be admitted into evidence in a civil action for damages. When the safety board names a “probable cause,” the whole country reads it as the verdict — but a jury in a wrongful death case will never hear it.
What the families can use are the raw facts the investigation forces into existence: the train’s speed, the brake application timing, the horn activation, the crossing signal data, the physical measurements of the scene. Those facts are admissible. The NTSB’s opinion about what caused the crash is not.
This is why a private forensic investigation — conducted by the family’s own accident reconstructionist, grade-crossing safety expert, and commercial-vehicle mechanical expert — must run in parallel with the NTSB’s work. The government will publish its conclusions in a year or two. The evidence that builds the civil case is disappearing now.
The Defendants: Who Is Responsible for Two Deaths and a Derailment
A collision like this does not have one defendant. It has a stack of them, and identifying every layer is the difference between a recovery that covers a family’s loss and one that falls short.
Union Pacific Railroad (FELA Defendant)
Union Pacific Railroad, headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska, is one of the two largest Class I freight railroads in North America, operating approximately 32,000 route miles across the western United States. It is a multi-billion-dollar corporation with substantial financial resources and a deep litigation history in grade-crossing collisions.
For the families of the two employees killed, Union Pacific is the FELA defendant. The railroad’s negligence — however slight — in crossing design, speed management, signal adequacy, sight-line maintenance, or crew warning systems creates liability under the federal statute. And Union Pacific’s corporate resources mean the FELA recovery path is not constrained by an insurance policy limit — the railroad’s own assets stand behind the judgment.
The Tractor-Trailer Operating Carrier
The tractor-trailer’s operating carrier has not been publicly identified in available reporting. The vehicle was hauling heavy equipment through the Permian Basin, which strongly suggests a specialized heavy-haul or oilfield-services carrier common to the region. Immediate investigative priorities include identifying the carrier’s DOT number, its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration operating authority, its MCS-90 or MCS-82 endorsement status, its safety rating, and its crash history through the FMCSA Safety Measurement System.
The carrier’s pocket depth, insurance stacking, and corporate structure — whether it is a single-asset LLC or a larger fleet operator — will directly determine how much can be recovered beyond Union Pacific’s FELA exposure. If the carrier is an interstate operator, federal financial-responsibility regulations require at least $750,000 in liability coverage for non-hazardous property — and more for certain hazmat. But that is a floor, not a ceiling. Many carriers carry far more, stacked in layers of primary, excess, and umbrella coverage.
The Heavy-Equipment Shipper and Loader
If the heavy equipment was not properly secured — if the chains, binders, or straps failed to meet the standards in 49 CFR Part 393 and the equipment became airborne on impact — the entity that loaded and secured the cargo is a separate defendant. The shipper’s liability is independent of the carrier’s, and the cargo-securement analysis is its own investigation.
The Grade-Crossing Owner and Maintainer
If the crossing lacked active warning devices, had an inadequate approach grade, had a surface condition that trapped the trailer, or had obstructed sight lines that prevented the truck from clearing or the train from receiving timely warning, the entity responsible for the crossing’s design and maintenance shares liability. That entity may be Union Pacific itself, a local government, or the Texas Department of Transportation. The Federal Railroad Administration establishes grade-crossing safety standards under 49 CFR Part 234, including requirements for active warning devices, signal inspection, and maintenance records — all of which will be central to the crossing-negligence analysis.
The Truck Maintenance Provider
If the tractor-trailer stalled due to a mechanical defect — a brake failure, a transmission failure, a fuel or electrical problem — any maintenance provider or fleet mechanic who serviced the vehicle is potentially liable for failing to maintain it in safe operating condition.
The Permian Basin Factor: Why This Crossing Was Dangerous
Pecos is not a random location for a truck-train collision. It is the county seat of Reeves County, positioned at the western edge of the Permian Basin, where oil and gas production has generated a tidal wave of heavy commercial truck traffic on roads that were never engineered for this volume or this weight. The Permian Basin’s oilfield trucking corridors cross rural rail lines at dozens of grade crossings — some with modern active warning systems, others with nothing more than a painted crossbuck and a prayer.
The truck that stalled on the tracks in Pecos was hauling heavy equipment. In the Permian Basin, that means it was likely one of hundreds of similar vehicles moving drilling rigs, frac equipment, pipe, and production hardware across the region every day. These trucks are heavy, wide, and slow. Their trailers have low ground clearance. When they encounter a grade crossing with a steep approach or a rough surface, they can become high-centered — the trailer’s belly catches on the rail or the crown of the road, and the truck is stuck.
This is not a rare event. It is a known hazard in oilfield regions. Crossing geometry — the angle of the approach, the height of the rail above the road surface, the transition from road to rail — determines whether a low-clearance heavy-haul trailer can traverse a crossing safely. If the crossing in Pecos had a geometry that was inadequate for heavy-haul traffic, and if that geometry was known or should have been known to the crossing’s owner or maintainer, the crossing itself is a defendant.
The Permian Basin factor also matters for the jury. Reeves County is a deeply conservative rural venue where oilfield industry connections run deep. Some jurors will have commercial-trucking ties. Others will have experienced crossing hazards firsthand. Voir dire — the jury-selection process — in any West Texas venue must account for these realities, exploring attitudes toward corporate accountability for safety failures without alienating a community that depends on the industry.
Evidence Is Disappearing Right Now: The Clocks That Kill Cases
Every record that proves what happened at that crossing in Pecos is on a clock. Some of those clocks are measured in years. Most are measured in months. A few are measured in days. The preservation letter — a formal demand that evidence be frozen — is the single most urgent step in the first week. Here is what exists, who holds it, how fast it can legally die, and why it decides the case.
The Train’s Event Recorder (NTSB Data Recorder)
The NTSB has already recovered the train’s data recorder and transported it to its laboratory. This device captured the train’s speed, brake application timing, horn activation, and collision dynamics. It is the single most important piece of physical evidence in the case, and it is in the government’s hands — which means it is preserved. Preliminary data may be available within weeks. This recorder will prove the train’s speed (approximately 68 mph per the NTSB), when the crew applied emergency brakes, whether the horn sounded, and the exact sequence of the collision.
The Tractor-Trailer’s Engine ECM and ELD Data
The truck’s engine electronic control module stores data that can reveal exactly what happened in the seconds before the stall: vehicle speed, throttle position, brake application, fault codes, and driver inputs. The electronic logging device tracks hours-of-service compliance. The ECM data may persist, but the vehicle’s impound status is uncertain, and the data can be overwritten or lost if the vehicle is serviced, the battery is disconnected, or the module is replaced. ELD data has a minimum retention of eight days but can be overwritten on the next cycle.
Who holds it: The carrier or the impound facility. How fast it dies: ECM data may persist indefinitely if undisturbed, but can be lost on servicing or power disruption. ELD data overwrites on a rolling cycle. Who we demand it from: The carrier, the impound facility, and the ELD vendor. Why it decides the case: The fault codes will prove whether the stall was mechanical — and if it was, whether the carrier knew about the defect before the truck left the yard.
Qualcomm/GPS Telematics and Dispatch Records
Most commercial carriers run telematics systems that track vehicle location, speed, route assignment, and dispatch communications in real time. These records can prove whether the carrier directed the driver through this specific crossing, whether the driver deviated from the assigned route, and what dispatch communications occurred during the minute the truck was on the tracks.
Who holds it: The carrier and the telematics vendor. How fast it dies: Carrier retention policies vary — typical purge cycles run 30 to 90 days. Who we demand it from: The carrier and the telematics provider. Why it decides the case: If the carrier routed this driver through a crossing inadequate for a heavy-haul trailer, the dispatch decision itself is negligence.
Grade-Crossing Signal Event Recorder and FRA Inspection Records
If the crossing was equipped with active warning devices — gates, flashing lights, bells — the signal system has an event recorder that logs when the signals activated, how long before the train’s arrival they triggered, and whether the gates descended properly. Federal Railroad Administration inspection records document the crossing’s maintenance history and any prior defects.
Who holds it: Union Pacific or the crossing maintainer, and the FRA. How fast it dies: Signal event data may overwrite within days to weeks. FRA inspection records are retained but must be requested formally. Who we demand it from: Union Pacific, the crossing maintainer, and the FRA. Why it decides the case: If the signals activated late, or not at all, or if prior inspections flagged defects that were never corrected, the crossing’s safety system failed — and that failure is railroad negligence under FELA and crossing-maintainer negligence under Texas law.
Chamber of Commerce and Nearby Business Surveillance Footage
Commercial buildings in downtown Pecos may have surveillance cameras that captured the truck’s approach, the stall, the driver’s actions during the minute on the tracks, the train’s approach, the collision, and the positions of people inside the building when the equipment struck it.
Who holds it: The Chamber of Commerce and neighboring businesses. How fast it dies: Commercial DVR systems typically overwrite on a 30-day cycle. Footage from December 18, 2024, would have been erased by mid-to-late January 2025 absent a preservation demand. Who we demand it from: Each business in the vicinity. Why it decides the case: This footage is the only independent visual record of the stall duration, the driver’s actions, and the impact dynamics. It cannot be reconstructed after it is gone.
Tractor-Trailer Maintenance and Inspection Records
The carrier is required to maintain records of the truck’s mechanical condition, prior repair history, pre-trip inspection compliance, and any known defects. Driver vehicle inspection reports must be retained for three months. Maintenance records may be destroyed under standard retention policies.
Who holds it: The carrier. How fast it dies: Driver vehicle inspection reports — only three months from the date prepared, the shortest retention clock in the federal trucking regulations. Other maintenance records may be purged on the carrier’s own schedule. Who we demand it from: The carrier. Why it decides the case: If prior drivers wrote up the defect that caused this stall, and the carrier did not fix it, the maintenance file is the proof that the company knew its truck was dangerous and sent it out anyway.
Driver Cell Phone Records
Cell phone records can prove whether the driver made emergency calls during the one-minute stall, was distracted at the time of the incident, or notified dispatch.
Who holds it: The cellular provider. How fast it dies: Provider data purge cycles typically run 90 to 180 days. Who we demand it from: The provider, by subpoena. Why it decides the case: If the driver called 911 or the railroad’s emergency line, that call establishes awareness and effort. If the driver was on the phone when the truck stalled, that is distraction. If the driver called dispatch and dispatch did nothing, the carrier’s response — or lack of it — is its own negligence.
Scene Photography, LiDAR, and Crossing Geometry Measurements
The physical scene — the crossing’s approach grade, sight-line obstructions, surface condition, warning device type and placement, and vehicle final resting positions — is being remediated. Track is being repaired. The roadway is being restored. Evidence is disappearing with every day that passes.
Who holds it: The scene itself, until it is altered. How fast it dies: The scene is changing now. Who we send: An accident reconstructionist and a grade-crossing safety expert to document the crossing geometry with LiDAR, orthogonal photography, and survey-grade measurements before the evidence is gone. Why it decides the case: The crossing’s physical characteristics — the approach angle, the rail height, the sight distance — cannot be reconstructed from photographs alone. They must be measured before the scene is restored.
Heavy-Equipment Cargo Securement and Weight Documentation
The bills of lading, load tickets, and securement documentation prove the load weight, the securement method, and whether the chains and binders met federal standards. The equipment itself may be moved from impound.
Who holds it: The carrier, the shipper, and the impound facility. How fast it dies: Bills of lading and load tickets are subject to routine destruction. The equipment may be moved or released. Who we demand it from: The carrier, the shipper, and the impound facility. Why it decides the case: If the securement failed and allowed the equipment to become airborne, the securement documentation — or its absence — proves whether the load was legally secured.
Driver Qualification File and Drug/Alcohol Test Results
Federal regulations require the carrier to maintain a driver qualification file documenting licensing, training, medical certification, and prior violations. After a fatal crash, the carrier is required to test the driver for alcohol within eight hours and for controlled substances within 32 hours. If the test was not done, the carrier must document why.
Who holds it: The carrier and the testing laboratory. How fast it dies: The qualification file is retained for employment plus three years. The post-accident testing window itself closes at eight hours (alcohol) and 32 hours (drugs) — miss it and the proof is gone forever. Who we demand it from: The carrier. Why it decides the case: If the driver was unqualified for heavy-haul operations, the qualification file proves the carrier should never have put him behind the wheel. If the drug test was never done, the carrier’s failure to test is itself a violation.
The Crew’s Hours-of-Service Records
Federal regulations require railroads to retain hours-of-duty records for train, signal, and dispatching employees for two years. These records show how long the crew had been on duty — a core fatigue-and-error record that can prove whether the crew’s reaction time was compromised.
Who holds it: Union Pacific. How fast it dies: Two years from creation. Who we demand it from: Union Pacific. Why it decides the case: If the crew had been on duty for an extended period, fatigue may have delayed their reaction — and that fatigue is the railroad’s responsibility under FELA.
The Cost of Destroyed Evidence
When a defendant lets required evidence die after receiving notice to preserve it, the law answers. A court may give an adverse-inference instruction — telling the jury they may assume the lost record was as bad for the defendant as the plaintiff says it was. Sanctions are available. In some jurisdictions, a separate claim for spoliation exists. The leverage begins the moment the preservation letter is on file. But a preservation letter sent after the footage has been overwritten is a letter that arrived too late.
What a Case Like This Is Worth: Honest Numbers
No attorney can guarantee a specific recovery. Every case depends on its facts, the defendants’ resources, the jurisdiction, the evidence, and the jury. But the framework for valuing a case like this is built from specific, knowable components — and an honest lawyer walks a family through that framework rather than inventing a number.
The Two Wrongful Death Claims
The two Union Pacific employee fatalities are the core of the case’s value. Railroad employees typically earn significant compensation with strong benefit packages, making the economic-loss components substantial. A forensic economist should be retained early to model the present value of each employee’s lost lifetime earnings, lost benefits, and lost household services.
Under FELA, the families can recover the full tort measure of damages — past and future lost earnings and earning capacity, full medical costs (if any were incurred before death), funeral and burial expenses, and the conscious pain and suffering the employee experienced between impact and death. There is no statutory cap on FELA damages. The comparative-fault reduction under FELA applies only if the employee’s own negligence contributed to the death — and if the railroad violated a federal safety statute, even that reduction is eliminated.
Under Texas wrongful-death and survival law, the families can recover lost earning capacity, lost wages and benefits, funeral expenses, mental anguish of surviving family members, loss of companionship and society, and any conscious pain and suffering between injury and death. Texas applies a modified comparative-negligence rule with a 51 percent bar — if the plaintiff is allocated 51 percent or more of the fault, recovery is barred; at 50 percent or less, recovery is reduced by the plaintiff’s percentage.
Based on the known facts of this case, the estimated case value range is approximately $5 million to $25 million, with each deceased employee’s family potentially recovering $3 million to $10 million depending on the employee’s age, earnings, dependents, and the degree of fault apportioned among defendants. These are estimates, not guarantees. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
The Three Minor Injury Claims
The three people who sustained injuries described as minor by the police chief have claims for emergency medical treatment, diagnostic evaluation, pain and suffering, and any temporary disability. These claims are more modest relative to the fatality claims — typically in the range of $50,000 to $250,000 per claimant — but they should not be dismissed. “Minor” injuries assessed at the scene can develop into more serious conditions over time. Concussions may not manifest symptoms for hours or days. Soft-tissue injuries can worsen. Psychological trauma from having heavy equipment crash through a building wall can produce lasting PTSD.
The Insurance Tower
For the FELA claims, Union Pacific’s corporate assets stand behind any judgment. The railroad is a multi-billion-dollar corporation. The FELA recovery path is not constrained by a policy limit in the way a third-party claim might be.
For the third-party claims against the trucking company, the coverage depends on carrier identification. An interstate carrier hauling non-hazardous property is federally required to carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage. But many carriers carry far more — layered in primary, excess, and umbrella policies. The MCS-90 endorsement, if applicable, ensures that the carrier’s insurer cannot deny coverage based on certain policy defenses. The real coverage tower is discoverable only through litigation.
Punitive damages may be available under Texas law if the trucking company’s conduct rises to gross negligence — knowingly dispatching a defective vehicle, ignoring prior stalling incidents, or routing an overweight load through an inadequate crossing. Texas limits exemplary damages under Chapter 38 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, generally capping them at the greater of $200,000 or two times economic damages plus non-economic damages up to $750,000. But there is no cap on compensatory damages in ordinary negligence cases.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook: What They Do and How to Counter It
Within days of a fatal grade-crossing collision, the machinery of claims defense begins to move. Railroad claim agents, trucking-company insurers, and third-party administrators start building their defense — preserving their evidence, taking statements, and framing the narrative — from the moment of the wreck. Here are the plays they run, and the counter to each.
Play 1: The “Friendly Check-In” Call
A claims agent or adjuster will call the family. The tone will be warm, sympathetic, and professional. They will say they just want to “check on you” and “get your side of the story.” The call is recorded. Everything the family says will be transcribed, analyzed, and — if it helps the defense — quoted in court.
The counter: Do not give a recorded statement without counsel. You are not required to. The adjuster’s friendliness is a technique, not a relationship. Every question is designed to elicit a response that can be used later — to minimize the loss, to shift blame, to lock the family into a version of events before the full evidence is known. The safest response is: “I am not ready to give a statement. Please contact my attorney.”
Play 2: The Fast Settlement Check
A check may arrive quickly — sometimes within weeks of the death. It will be accompanied by a release document. The amount will seem substantial in the moment. It will be a fraction of what the case is worth. The release, once signed, extinguishes all claims against the railroad or the trucking company — permanently.
The counter: Do not sign anything, cash any check, or accept any settlement offer before consulting independent counsel. Under FELA, any release designed to exempt the railroad from liability is void — but the family should never have to rely on that legal technicality when a simple refusal to sign is available. Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm. He sat in the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue claims. He knows that the first offer is always a fraction of the case’s true value, and that the release attached to it is designed to close the file cheaply before the family understands what was taken from them.
Play 3: The “It Was Just an Accident” Framing
The defense will frame the collision as an unavoidable tragedy — the truck broke down, the train could not stop, and no one was at fault. This framing is designed to suppress the family’s sense that someone is responsible and to reduce the emotional drive to pursue a claim.
The counter: A commercial truck does not stall on a railway crossing by accident. Either the vehicle was not maintained, the driver was not qualified, the route was not safe, the crossing was not adequate, or the railroad’s warning systems were not sufficient. Each of these is a choice made by a company — a choice that had a consequence. The evidence will show which choices were made and by whom. The collision was not an accident. It was the result of decisions that someone made and someone else will have to answer for.
Play 4: The Independent Medical Examination
For the injured building occupants, the insurer may demand an “independent” medical examination with a doctor of the insurer’s choosing. The examination is not independent. The doctor is selected by the defense, paid by the defense, and the report is designed to minimize or dispute the injury.
The counter: You have the right to choose your own treating physicians. Be cautious about attending a defense medical examination without understanding your rights. Document everything. If the examination produces a report that contradicts your treating doctor’s findings, the contradiction is fought with your own medical evidence — not by accepting the defense doctor’s conclusion.
Play 5: Social-Media and Surveillance Monitoring
The defense will monitor the family’s social-media accounts. They may conduct surveillance. A photograph of a family member smiling at a funeral — a moment of dark humor or shared grief — can be presented to a jury as evidence that the family is not suffering as much as they claim.
The counter: Assume you are being watched. Set social-media accounts to private. Do not post about the case, the collision, the defendants, or your daily activities. Do not discuss the case with anyone outside your immediate family and your attorneys. This is not paranoia — it is standard defense practice.
The Proof Story: How a Case Like This Is Actually Built
Here is how a case like this moves from the day of the collision to the day a number is placed in front of a jury.
Week one. The preservation letters go out — to the tractor-trailer’s operating carrier, to the truck owner, to the heavy-equipment shipper, to Union Pacific for crossing signal data and inspection records, to the Chamber of Commerce and neighboring businesses for surveillance footage, to the telematics vendor, to the impound facility. Each letter names the specific records to be frozen. Each letter creates a legal duty to preserve. Each letter is the foundation for a spoliation argument if the evidence disappears.
Weeks two through four. The NTSB preliminary report may arrive. The train’s event recorder data begins to take shape. The accident reconstructionist documents the crossing geometry before the scene is fully restored. The commercial-vehicle mechanical expert examines the impounded tractor-trailer and downloads the engine ECM. The grade-crossing safety expert begins evaluating the crossing’s compliance with FRA standards.
Months one through three. Records demands go out under the FMCSA regulations — the driver qualification file, the hours-of-service logs, the vehicle maintenance records, the drug and alcohol test results, the cargo securement documentation. The FRA inspection records for the crossing are requested formally. The cellular provider is subpoenaed for the driver’s phone records. The telematics vendor is subpoenaed for GPS and dispatch data.
Months three through six. Expert reports are produced. The accident reconstructionist models the collision dynamics and the one-minute timeline. The mechanical expert identifies the stall causation. The grade-crossing expert evaluates the crossing’s adequacy. The forensic economist quantifies the lost-earnings claims for the two deceased employees. Depositions begin — the truck driver, the carrier’s safety director, the railroad’s crossing-maintenance personnel, the responding officers.
Months six through twelve. The depositions deepen. The safety director explains the carrier’s choices under oath. The railroad’s signal maintainer testifies about the crossing’s inspection history. The shipper’s loading supervisor testifies about the cargo securement. Each deposition is an opportunity to lock in testimony before trial — and to find the admissions that build the case.
The number. The final demand is built from all of it — the economic losses modeled by the forensic economist, the human losses proven by the family’s testimony and the evidence of the employee’s life, the punitive-damages exposure if the corporate conduct supports it. The number is not invented. It is built, piece by piece, from the evidence that was frozen in the first week and developed over the months that followed.
Your First 72 Hours: What to Do and What to Refuse
If you are the family of one of the Union Pacific employees killed in Pecos, or if you were injured in the Chamber of Commerce building, here is what the first 72 hours should look like.
Do seek medical attention. If you were in the building when the equipment struck, see a doctor — even if you feel fine. Concussions and internal injuries may not manifest symptoms for hours. Soft-tissue injuries can worsen over days. A contemporaneous medical record is the proof that your injury was caused by the collision, not by something that happened later. For the families of the deceased, obtain the death certificate and any medical records from the scene.
Do preserve everything. Do not delete text messages, voicemails, or call logs. Do not dispose of clothing or personal effects. Photograph any visible injuries. Keep all medical bills, pharmacy receipts, and documentation of missed work. If the employee had a work calendar, a timesheet, a benefits statement, or a pension record — preserve it. These documents prove the economic loss.
Do refuse to give a recorded statement. To anyone. The railroad’s claim agent, the trucking company’s insurer, the third-party administrator — they all want the same thing: a statement from the family that locks them into a version of events before the full evidence is known. Say: “I am not ready to give a statement. Please contact my attorney.”
Do refuse to sign anything. No release, no authorization, no settlement agreement, no medical-release form presented by an insurance company. Some authorizations allow the insurer to obtain your entire medical history, not just the records related to the collision. Do not sign any document without having an attorney review it first.
Do not post on social media. Assume the defense is watching. Do not post about the collision, the family’s grief, daily activities, or anything that could be taken out of context. A photograph of a family gathering can be presented to a jury as evidence that the family is “moving on.” A comment about feeling “okay” can be quoted as proof that the injuries were not serious.
Do call an attorney. The preservation letters need to go out now. The evidence is disappearing. The NTSB investigation is running, but it is not building your civil case. A lawyer who handles FELA claims and commercial-trucking wrongful death cases — who understands the dual-track liability structure, the evidence clocks, and the insurance-defense playbook — is not a luxury in the first week. The legal deadlines are measured in years, but the physical evidence, the surveillance footage, and the electronic data that win these cases are measured in days and weeks.
The Medicine: What the Bodies Endured
A freight train traveling 68 miles per hour weighs thousands of tons. The kinetic energy at that speed is staggering. When the locomotive struck the tractor-trailer, the forces transferred through the train’s frame to the cab where the crew sat. The derailment that followed means the locomotive and the cars behind it left the tracks — rolling, pitching, and crushing everything in their path.
For the two Union Pacific employees who were killed, the mechanism of death was almost certainly a combination of blunt-force trauma and crush injury. The locomotive cab — the enclosed space where the engineer and conductor work — is the point of maximum energy transfer in a head-on collision with an object on the tracks. The derailment adds rotational and rolling forces that can eject, crush, or trap the crew. Whether death was instantaneous or involved conscious pain and suffering between impact and death is a question that the medical examiner’s report, the autopsy findings, and the physical evidence of the cab’s post-collision condition will answer — and it is a question that matters for the survival-action component of the damages.
For the three people in the Chamber of Commerce building, the mechanism of injury was different. The heavy equipment was propelled from the trailer into the building. The injuries described as “minor” by the police chief may include concussion from the building impact, lacerations from flying glass and debris, musculoskeletal injuries from the sudden impact or from being thrown, and acoustic trauma from the sound of the collision and the equipment striking the building.
But “minor” at the scene is not “minor” forever. A concussion that seems like a headache today can become persistent post-concussion syndrome — with headaches, memory problems, difficulty concentrating, and personality changes that last months or years. A soft-tissue injury that feels like stiffness today can become a chronic pain condition. And the psychological impact of having heavy equipment crash through a building wall — the sudden violence, the fear, the loss of a sense of safety — can produce post-traumatic stress disorder that requires years of treatment.
Every injury should be documented by a treating physician from the day of the collision forward. The medical record is the proof — and a gap between the collision and the first documented treatment is the defense’s favorite argument for denying that the injury was caused by the crash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the families of the railroad workers sue Union Pacific?
Yes. The families of the two Union Pacific employees killed in the collision have a claim under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, or FELA — a federal law that allows railroad employees (or their families, in the case of death) to sue the railroad for negligence. FELA is not workers’ compensation. It is a fault-based claim, but the standard for proving the railroad’s fault is the lowest in American injury law: the railroad is liable if its negligence played any part, even the slightest, in the death. The families can also pursue a separate third-party negligence claim against the trucking company that stalled on the tracks. These two claims run under different laws, in different courthouses, with different deadlines.
How long do the families have to file a claim?
The FELA claims have a three-year statute of limitations — the families have three years from the date of death to file a FELA lawsuit. The third-party negligence claims against the trucking company run under Texas law, which generally imposes a two-year statute of limitations for wrongful death claims. Two years passes faster than most families expect — and the evidence that proves the case will not wait even that long. Surveillance footage, ECM data, telematics records, and scene evidence can disappear within weeks or months.
What if the trucking company’s insurance is not enough to cover two deaths?
Federal regulations require an interstate carrier hauling non-hazardous property to carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage, but many carriers carry far more in layered excess and umbrella policies. Beyond the insurance, the carrier’s own corporate assets may be reachable if the company is solvent. And the FELA claims against Union Pacific provide a separate recovery path against a multi-billion-dollar railroad that is not constrained by an insurance policy limit. Identifying every defendant and every layer of coverage is one of the first things a thorough investigation accomplishes.
The NTSB said the truck was on the tracks for a minute — does that prove the trucking company is at fault?
The NTSB’s findings are not admissible in a civil trial. Federal law keeps the NTSB’s probable-cause conclusions out of the courtroom — a jury will never hear the board’s opinion about who was at fault. What the jury can hear are the raw facts the investigation surfaces: the speed of the train, the duration of the stall, the signal data, the physical measurements. The fact that the truck was on the tracks for a minute is powerful evidence — but it is evidence that the family’s own experts must present, not a conclusion the jury can adopt from the NTSB report.
I was in the Chamber of Commerce building when the equipment hit it — what are my rights?
You have a negligence claim against every party whose conduct contributed to the heavy equipment being propelled into the building: the tractor-trailer’s operating carrier, the driver, the heavy-equipment shipper or loader if the cargo securement failed, and potentially the grade-crossing owner or maintainer if the crossing’s design contributed to the collision dynamics. Even if your injuries were described as “minor” at the scene, you should seek a full medical evaluation and document your symptoms over time. Concussions, soft-tissue injuries, and psychological trauma can develop after the initial assessment.
The truck was hauling heavy equipment in the Permian Basin — does that matter for the case?
Yes. The Permian Basin generates some of the heaviest commercial truck traffic in North America, and the grade crossings in this region are crossed daily by vehicles that were never contemplated when many of these crossings were designed. If the crossing in Pecos had a geometry that was inadequate for heavy-haul traffic — a steep approach, a rough surface, a tight angle — and if that inadequacy was known or should have been known, the crossing itself is a defendant. The oilfield context also matters for jury selection in Reeves County, where the oilfield industry’s local presence shapes juror attitudes toward commercial trucking and corporate accountability.
A railroad claims agent contacted our family — should we talk to them?
No. Not without an attorney. Railroad claim agents are professionals whose job is to protect the railroad’s financial interests. They are trained to be sympathetic, to build rapport, and to elicit information that can be used to minimize the railroad’s exposure. Everything you say can be used against you. FELA specifically voids any release or waiver designed to exempt the railroad from liability — but the family should never have to rely on that legal technicality when a simple refusal to speak is available. The safest response is: “I am not ready to talk. Please contact my attorney.”
What happens to the evidence while the NTSB investigates?
The NTSB’s investigation preserves some evidence — the train’s data recorder, for example, is in the government’s hands. But the NTSB does not preserve evidence for the families’ civil case. The tractor-trailer’s ECM data, the telematics records, the surveillance footage, the maintenance records, the driver’s phone records, and the crossing’s physical geometry are all on separate clocks, and most of them are controlled by the defendants — the trucking company and the railroad. A preservation letter from the family’s attorney is the only thing that creates a legal duty for those defendants to freeze the evidence. Without it, the records can be legally destroyed on their normal retention schedules.
Can we sue if the crossing did not have gates or flashing lights?
Potentially, yes. If the crossing lacked active warning devices — gates, flashing lights, bells — and the absence of those devices contributed to the collision, the entity responsible for the crossing’s design and maintenance may be liable. The Federal Railroad Administration establishes standards for grade-crossing safety under federal regulations, and the crossing’s inspection and maintenance records will show whether the absence of active warning devices was a known, documented condition. Under FELA, if the railroad’s failure to maintain adequate crossing protection played any part in the deaths — even the slightest — the railroad is liable.
How much is a case like this worth?
No attorney can guarantee a specific recovery, and any lawyer who tells you a number in the first conversation is not being honest with you. The value of a case like this depends on the age, earnings, and dependents of each deceased employee; the degree of fault apportioned among the defendants; the available insurance coverage and corporate assets; the jurisdiction where the case is filed; and the evidence that is preserved and presented. Based on the known facts, the estimated range is approximately $5 million to $25 million, with each family’s claim potentially valued at $3 million to $10 million. But these are estimates built from the framework, not promises. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
Why This Firm
Ralph Manginello has spent 27-plus years in courtrooms, including federal court. He is admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He is a member of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association and the Houston Bar Association. He was a journalist before he was a lawyer, which means he learned early that the story is in the details — the fault code on the ECM, the timestamp on the signal recorder, the gap in the maintenance log. He has spent his career finding those details and making them matter in front of juries.
Lupe Peña is a former insurance-defense attorney. He spent years inside a national defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue people exactly like the families reading this page. He knows how claims are valued, how reserves are set, how IME doctors are selected, how surveillance is deployed, and how delay is engineered. He now uses that knowledge for injured clients. And he conducts full consultations in Spanish — without an interpreter.
We handle commercial trucking cases and wrongful death cases across Texas. We are based in Houston, with offices in Austin and Beaumont, and we take cases in Reeves County and throughout West Texas. Our fee is contingency — 33.33 percent before trial, 40 percent if the case goes to trial. We do not get paid unless we win your case. The first consultation is free, and we are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. When you call, you reach our live staff — not an answering service.
Hablamos Español. Lupe conducts consultations entirely in Spanish. If your family communicates more comfortably in Spanish, you will never need an interpreter to understand your rights.
The evidence in Pecos is disappearing. The surveillance footage from the Chamber of Commerce overwrote itself weeks ago if no one demanded it be saved. The telematics data from the truck may be on a 30-day purge cycle. The ECM data may be lost if the vehicle has been serviced. The crossing geometry is changing as the scene is repaired. Every day that passes is a day the defense uses to build its case while the families are still burying their dead.
The call is free. The consultation is confidential. And the preservation letter goes out the day you call us — not the day you finally decide the grief has settled enough to think about a lawyer. By then, the evidence that proves your case may be gone.
Call 1-888-ATTY-911 — that is 1-888-288-9911. Or call our direct line at (713) 528-9070. We answer at 2am because that is when the call comes.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. This page is legal information, not legal advice. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship until a written agreement is signed. But the call is the first step — and in a case where the evidence is measured in days, the first step is the one that matters most.