Hit by a Metro Train in California: Wrongful Death Claims After the Pasadena A Line Crash

Light rail runs quietly through neighborhoods across Southern California, often within a few steps of sidewalks, homes, and busy streets. When a train and a person on foot meet, the result is almost always catastrophic. For the family left behind, grief arrives alongside hard questions: what happened, who is responsible for keeping people safe near the tracks, and what can be done while answers are still unknown.

In short: a family that loses someone in a light rail crash in California may be able to bring a wrongful death claim, but when the train is run by a public agency such as Metro, special rules apply. In most cases a written government claim must be presented within six months of the death, and liability depends on evidence about the train’s operation, the crossing or right of way, and the conduct of everyone involved. Key evidence like train video and recorder data should be requested quickly.

If you lost a family member or were hurt in a train or transit crash anywhere in California, Win Attorneys handles mass transit accidents and wrongful death and catastrophic injury claims statewide. If you were injured, seek medical care first.

Talk to us at (562) 296-5380 or reach out through our contact page for a free case review. Office: 17291 Irvine Blvd., Suite 210, Tustin, CA 92780.

What Happened Near Fillmore Station

On Monday, October 12, 2026, a Metro A Line train struck and killed a pedestrian in Pasadena, according to a City News Service report published by Pasadena Now. A Metro spokesperson said the person was struck on the tracks south of Fillmore Station, near the intersection of Glenarm Street and Arroyo Seco Parkway. Pasadena Fire Department personnel responded and confirmed the death.

The 75 passengers aboard the train were safely evacuated, and no other injuries were reported. Service between Fillmore and South Pasadena stations was halted, with trains turning back at each station and a bus bridge carrying riders between them. A Line service resumed by 2:30 a.m. on Tuesday, October 13, according to Pasadena Now. The Pasadena Ledger reported the same details on October 14.

In a statement quoted by Pasadena Now, Metro said: “Metro reminds all riders to stay behind the yellow safety line, remain aware at rail stations and never walk on or near train tracks, even when they are designated as safe crossings.”

The person’s identity and the circumstances of the collision had not been released as of October 15. We are not assigning fault to anyone, and nothing in the reports explains how the person came to be on the tracks. Our sympathies go to the family and friends of the person who died, and to the train operator and passengers who were there.

The rest of this page explains, in general terms, how California law treats claims after a pedestrian is struck by light rail.

Metro Is a Public Entity, and That Changes the Rules

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, known as Metro, is a public agency. Claims against public entities in California are governed by the Government Claims Act, which sets its own deadlines and its own standards for liability. Our LA Metro accidents page covers Metro claims in more depth.

Two paths to liability usually matter in a train and pedestrian case:

Employee conduct. Under Government Code section 815.2, a public entity is generally liable for injuries caused by an employee’s act or omission within the scope of employment, if the employee would be liable. For a train operator, the question is usually whether reasonable care was used given what could be seen and done in the time available.
Dangerous condition of public property. Government Code section 835 is discussed in the next section.

Dangerous Condition Claims: Crossings, Warnings, and Fencing

Under Government Code section 835, a public entity can be liable for an injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if the property was in a dangerous condition at the time, the condition caused the injury, the risk of that kind of injury was reasonably foreseeable, and either an employee created the condition or the entity had notice of it in time to protect against it. Section 830 defines a dangerous condition as one that creates a substantial, not minor or trivial, risk of injury when the property is used with due care in a reasonably foreseeable way. Under section 835.2, notice can be actual knowledge or constructive notice, meaning the condition existed long enough and was obvious enough that a reasonable inspection would have found it.

In rail cases, the questions often include:

Was a pedestrian crossing designed and signed appropriately for how people actually use it?
Were warning devices, such as flashing lights, bells, and gates, present and working?
Were there gaps in fencing or barriers along a section where people were known to cut across?
Did vegetation, structures, or curves limit what the operator or the pedestrian could see?

These claims are difficult and fact specific. The phrase “used with due care” matters: if a court finds that the property was not dangerous to people using it carefully, a claim under section 835 may fail even if a tragedy occurred. We do not know whether any crossing or condition played a part in the Pasadena crash.

California’s light rail safety rules

The California Public Utilities Commission sets safety rules for light rail. General Order 143-B establishes safety requirements for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of light rail systems, and states that the safety of patrons, employees, and the public is of primary importance. Among other things, it requires trains to carry a bell or horn audible at a set distance, requires automatic warning signals to control pedestrian traffic where light rail crosses streets at grade, and calls for curbs, fences, or barriers along separate right of way where pedestrians or vehicles are likely to encroach onto the tracks. It also says it generally does not require changes to systems built before its effective date, except for maintenance.

General Order 75-D sets uniform standards for warning devices at at-grade crossings used by motor vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. A rule violation does not automatically establish liability, and compliance does not automatically defeat a claim, but these standards are often part of the analysis.

Passengers and Pedestrians: Different Duties

California Civil Code section 2100 requires a carrier of persons for reward to use the utmost care and diligence for their safe carriage. That heightened duty protects passengers, people who are being carried. A pedestrian outside the train is generally owed ordinary care, the standard stated in Civil Code section 1714, which makes everyone responsible for injuries caused by a lack of ordinary care.

In practice, that means a pedestrian’s family must usually show that the operator or the agency failed to act as a reasonably careful operator or agency would have under the circumstances, or that a dangerous condition of public property caused the death.

Comparative Fault

California follows comparative fault. If a jury finds that more than one person contributed to a death, including the person who died, damages are reduced by each share of responsibility rather than barred outright. In train cases, agencies often argue that a pedestrian was trespassing or failed to heed warnings. Those arguments depend on evidence, and they do not end a claim on their own.

When a public entity shares fault with others, a recent change in the law may also affect how economic damages are divided in lawsuits filed starting in 2027. Our article on what SB 577 changes for public entity injury claims explains it.

Deadlines: Six Months to Present a Claim

The most important rule for families to know is the deadline:

Government claim. Under Government Code section 911.2, a claim for death or personal injury against a public entity must be presented no later than six months after the cause of action accrues. For a wrongful death claim, that is generally measured from the date of death.
Lawsuit after a rejection. Under Government Code section 945.6, if the agency gives written notice rejecting the claim, a lawsuit generally must be filed within six months after that notice is delivered or mailed. If no written notice is given, the time is generally two years from accrual.
Private parties. For claims against a private party, the general deadline is two years under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1.

Late claim relief exists in narrow circumstances, but it should never be counted on. Our guide to the six-month transit claim deadline and our government claims page walk through the process.

Who Can Bring a Wrongful Death Claim

Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 lists who may bring a wrongful death action. It starts with the surviving spouse or domestic partner, children, and, if there are none, those entitled to the person’s property by intestate succession. In some cases others who were financially dependent on the person may also bring a claim. Damages can include the loss of financial support and the loss of love, companionship, and guidance.

Evidence to Preserve Quickly

Rail evidence is often controlled entirely by the agency, and some of it is recorded over on a schedule. Families and their lawyers typically ask, in writing and as early as possible, for the agency to preserve:

Train camera video, including forward facing and platform cameras.
The train’s event recorder data, which can show speed, braking, horn and bell use, and throttle position.
Crossing signal and warning device logs, showing when lights, bells, or gates activated.
Station and wayside camera footage near the location.
Operator records, including training, hours on duty, and radio communications.
Maintenance and inspection records for the track, fencing, signals, and train.
Prior incident reports at the same location, which can bear on notice.

Independent evidence matters too: photographs of the area, nearby business or home cameras, and the names of witnesses.

Talk With Win Attorneys

Win Attorneys helps families across Los Angeles, Orange County, and the rest of California from our Tustin office. A transit claim moves on a short clock, and we can help a family understand its options while the facts are still being gathered. Our office is fluent in Spanish and Vietnamese; say so when you call. Learn more about pedestrian and micromobility accidents.

Talk to us at (562) 296-5380, write through our contact page, or visit 17291 Irvine Blvd., Suite 210, Tustin, CA 92780. The case review is free.

Metro Train Pedestrian Crash FAQs

Can a family sue Metro if a train hits and kills a pedestrian?

Possibly. Metro is a public entity, so a claim usually rests on employee conduct under Government Code section 815.2 or a dangerous condition of public property under section 835. A written government claim generally must be presented first.

How long do we have to file a claim against Metro after a death?

Under Government Code section 911.2, a claim for death or injury against a public entity must be presented within six months after the cause of action accrues, which for wrongful death is generally the date of death.

What happens after Metro rejects a claim?

Under Government Code section 945.6, if written notice of rejection is given, a lawsuit generally must be filed within six months after the notice is delivered or mailed. Without written notice, the time is generally two years.

Does Metro owe pedestrians the same duty it owes passengers?

No. Civil Code section 2100 requires utmost care toward passengers. Pedestrians are generally owed ordinary care under Civil Code section 1714.

What if the person who died was on the tracks?

That does not automatically bar a claim. California uses comparative fault, so damages may be reduced by the share of responsibility assigned to each person, including the person who died.

What safety rules apply to light rail crossings in California?

The CPUC’s General Order 143-B sets light rail safety rules, including audible warnings and automatic pedestrian warning signals at street crossings, and General Order 75-D sets standards for crossing warning devices.

Who can file a wrongful death claim after a train crash?

Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 allows the surviving spouse or domestic partner, children, and others entitled by intestate succession to sue, and in some cases certain dependents.

Disclaimer

This page is general information for educational purposes. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Crash details are attributed to Pasadena Now (City News Service) and the Pasadena Ledger as of October 14, 2026, and may change. No fault is assigned to anyone. Outcomes depend on the facts of each matter. Seek medical care for injuries. Consult a licensed California attorney about your situation.