Montana

Jury: BNSF Railway contributed to 2 deaths in Montana town where asbestos sickened thousands

Published

2 years ago

April 22, 2024

Jury: BNSF Railway contributed to 2 deaths in Montana town where asbestos sickened thousands

A federal jury on Monday said Warren Buffett’s BNSF Railway contributed to the deaths of two people who were exposed to asbestos decades ago when tainted mining material was shipped through a Montana town where thousands have been sickened.

The jury awarded $4 million each in compensatory damages to the estates of the two plaintiffs, who died in 2020. The jury did not find that BNSF acted intentionally or with indifference so there will be no punitive damages awarded.

Attorneys for the estates of the two victims had argued that the railroad, owned by Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate, knew the asbestos-tainted vermiculite was dangerous but failed to act.

BNSF said its employees didn’t know the vermiculite they hauled over decades from a nearby mine was filled with hazardous microscopic asbestos fibers.

The case in federal civil court over the two deaths was the first of numerous lawsuits against the Texas-based railroad corporation to reach trial over its past operations in Libby. Current and former residents of the small town near the U.S.-Canada border want BNSF held accountable, accusing it of playing a role in asbestos exposure that health officials say has killed several hundred people and sickened thousands.

The railroad said it was obliged under law to ship the vermiculite, which was used in insulation and for other commercial purposes, and that W.R. Grace employees had concealed the health hazards from the railroad.

BNSF attorney Chad Knight said the railroad could only be held liable if it could have foreseen the health hazards of asbestos based on information available decades ago when the alleged exposures happened.

“In the 50s, 60s and 70s no one in the public suspected there might be health concerns,” Knight said Friday.

The plaintiffs argued that BNSF higher-ups knew for decades that the vermiculite contained asbestos and that concerns about workers breathing asbestos dust had existed in medical journals since the late 1890s.

“We’re here to make a party that accepts zero responsibility accept an appropriate amount of responsibility,” plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Lanier said in his closing statement. “This is the fault of the bigwigs in the corporate office.”

The judge instructed the jury it could only find the railroad negligent based on its actions in the Libby Railyard, not for hauling the vermiculite.

BNSF was formed in 1995 from the merger of Burlington Northern railroad, which operated in Libby for decades, and the Santa Fe Pacific Corporation.

Berkshire Hathaway, based in Nebraska and chaired by Buffett, acquired BNSF in 2010.

Looming over the proceedings was W.R. Grace, which operated a mountaintop vermiculite mine 7 miles (11 kilometers) outside of Libby until it closed in 1990. The Maryland-based company played a central role in Libby’s tragedy and has paid significant settlements to victims.

U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris referred to the the chemical company as “the elephant in the room” during the BNSF trial and reminded jurors repeatedly that the case was about the railroad’s conduct, not W.R. Grace’s separate liability.

Federal prosecutors in 2005 indicted W. R. Grace and executives from the company on criminal charges over the contamination in Libby. A jury acquitted them following a 2009 trial.

The Environmental Protection Agency descended on Libby after 1999 news reports of illnesses and deaths among mine workers and their families. In 2009 the agency declared in Libby the nation’s first ever public health emergency under the federal Superfund cleanup program.

The pollution in Libby has been cleaned up, largely at public expense. Yet the long timeframe over which asbestos-related diseases develop means people previously exposed are likely to continue getting sick for years to come, health officials say.

The seven-member federal jury had been instructed to decide if the railroad was at fault in the deaths and if so, the amount of damages to award to their estates. A separate proceeding would be needed to determine the amount of any punitive damages.

A second trial against the railroad over the death of a Libby resident is scheduled for May in federal court in Missoula.

Source link

Montana

Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for March 2, 2026

Published

32 minutes ago

March 3, 2026

Press Room

The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at March 2, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from March 2 drawing

02-17-18-38-62, Powerball: 20, Power Play: 2

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Lotto America numbers from March 2 drawing

03-08-17-24-34, Star Ball: 06, ASB: 02

Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from March 2 drawing

06-12-19-29, Bonus: 11

Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from March 2 drawing

21-28-58-65-67, Powerball: 25

Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 2 drawing

28-41-42-50-55, Bonus: 02

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?

Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.

Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.

Source link

Montana

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Published

13 hours ago

March 2, 2026

Press Room

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Everyone makes mistakes, even experienced professionals; a good reminder for the rest of us to learn from those mistakes. The motion in State v. Stroup starts off well in its initial pages (no case law hallucinations), but is then followed by several pages of two other motions, which I don’t think the lawyer was planning to file, and which appear to have been AI-generated: It begins with the “Below is concise motion language you can drop into …” language quoted above.

Griffen Smith (Missoulian) reported on the story, and included the prosecutor’s motion to strike that filing, on the grounds that it violates a local rule (3(G)) requiring disclosure of the use of generative AI:

The document does not include a generative artificial intelligence disclosure as required. However, page 7 begins as follows: “Below is concise motion language you can drop into a ‘Motion to Admit Mental-Disease Evidence and for Related Instructions’ keyed to 45-6-204, 45-6-201, and 4614-102. Adjust headings/captions to your local practice.” Page 10 states “Below is a full motion you can paste into your pleading, then adjust names, dates, and styles to fit local practice.” These pages also include several apparent hyperlinks to “ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws,” “ppl-ai-fileupload.s3.amazonaws+1,” and others. The document includes what appears to be an attempt at a second case caption on page 12. It is not plausible on its face that any source other than generative AI would have created such language for a filed version of a brief….

There’s more in that filing, but here’s one passage:

While generative AI can be a useful tool for some purposes and may have greater application in the future, when used improperly, and without meaningful review, it can ultimately damage both the perception and the reality of the profession. One assumes that Mr. Stroup has had, or will at some point have, an opportunity to review the filing made on his behalf. What impression could a review of pgs. 12-19 leave upon a defendant who struggles with paranoia and delusional thinking? While AI could theoretically one day become a replacement for portions of staff of experienced attorneys, it is readily apparent that this day has not yet arrived.

The Missoulan article includes this response:

In a Wednesday interview, Office of Public Defender Division Administrator Brian Smith told the Missoulian the AI-generated language was inadvertently included in an unrelated filing. And he criticized the county attorney’s office for filing a “four-page diatribe about the dangers of AI” instead of working with the defense to correct her mistake.
“That’s not helping the client or the case,” Smith said, “and all you are doing is trying to throw a professional colleague under the bus.”

As I mentioned, the lawyer involved seems quite experienced, and ran for the Montana Public Service Commission in 2020 (getting nearly 48% of the vote) and for the House of Representatives in Montana’s first district in 2022 (getting over 46% of the vote) and in 2024 (getting over 44%). “Его пример другим наука,” Pushkin wrote in Eugene Onegin—”May his example profit others,” in the Falen translation.

Thanks to Matthew Monforton for the pointer.

Source link