(The following article by Todd Cooper was posted on the Omaha World-Herald website on January 18.)
OMAHA — Folks have sued Union Pacific for a lot of reasons.
Dangerous crossings. Lung disease. Chronic back problems.
But now, the Omaha-based railroad giant is being blamed for something small and pesky.
A mosquito bite.
In a lawsuit filed in Douglas County District Court, Vivika A. Deviney said she was bitten by mosquitoes Aug. 3, 2003, while inspecting trains as a conductor for Union Pacific near Bill, Wyo.
She says in the lawsuit that the mosquito bites led to West Nile virus, which caused permanent injuries and required thousands of dollars of medical treatment. She asks for at least $100,000 in damages.
Attorneys for the Douglas, Wyo., woman said they believe they can pinpoint the date she contracted the virus. And they believe they can further narrow it down, through a process of elimination, to a bite suffered on the job.
But can the railroad be held responsible for an insect bite?
Deviney’s Omaha attorney, Richard Dinsmore, said it can, if he can prove that Union Pacific officials knew of an existing problem, such as swampy mosquito breeding grounds, and failed to remedy it.
Union Pacific has yet to respond to the lawsuit.
“It sounds silly at first blush,” Dinsmore said. “But these things are not uncommon where they put people into areas where they know that their people are going to be at risk.
“It sounds relatively harmless. It sounds like it’s a nuisance. This was a very severe consequence.”
The lawsuit says Deviney suffered permanent injury and disability and has been unable to work because of the virus, which can be deadly.
Dinsmore said he and another attorney will try to pinpoint, through probabilities, when Deviney was bitten. For example, Dinsmore asked, was it more likely that she was bitten on the job or on her couch at home?
Dinsmore acknowledged that such lawsuits are rare. But he said other employers have been sued for injuries or diseases caused by “vermin.”
“The railroad has a duty to provide its employees with a safe working environment,” Dinsmore said. “That’s the burden that is placed on them.
“If it’s not a foreseeable (danger), then the courts don’t recognize the claim as valid. We’re saying it was foreseeable.”