The Money Was There in 2023. The Stop Signs Still Weren't.

Before dawn on September 10, two men from Kingsland, Texas, a 73-year-old grandfather and his 22-year-old grandson, were driving west on Church Road in rural Cass County, just southwest of Plattsmouth. At about 5:59 a.m., according to 10/11 NOW, their SUV collided with a northbound Union Pacific train. Both were pronounced dead at the scene. The Cass County Sheriff's Office is investigating, and Union Pacific is conducting its own investigation.

I am deeply sorry for this family. Losing two generations at once, far from home, is a grief that's hard to put into words.

A month later, KOLN reported something that has stayed with me. Records obtained through a public-records request show the Nebraska Department of Transportation has had full federal funding for safety upgrades at that crossing since December 2023. According to the report:

• In December 2024, NDOT and Union Pacific visited the crossing together.
• Their notes recommended replacing the yield signs with stop signs and clearing vegetation and hills on all four sides to make the tracks more visible.
• About a year after that visit, NDOT sent Union Pacific a contract for the federally funded work.
• As of October 6, the contract was still unsigned.

Union Pacific's response, as reported, was that crossing upgrades involve multiple state and local agencies and generally take years to complete. The company called the crash tragic and said it has been working to upgrade the crossing.

To be clear: the records don't explain why the contract sat, and what caused this crash is for the investigators to determine. I'm not involved in this matter, and nothing below comments on fault. What I can explain is how crossings like this work and what Nebraska law says about them.

Two signs, two very different instructions

My page on dangerous crossing design explains the difference between passive crossings (signs only) and active ones (lights, bells, gates). What that page doesn't get into is the sign most rural Nebraskans see at a passive crossing: the yield sign mounted under the crossbuck.

The federal traffic-control manual drives that choice. In the 2009 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Section 8B.04 says a yield sign "shall be the default traffic control device" on the crossbuck at a passive crossing. A stop sign is supposed to be the exception, used only after an engineering study, and the manual says stop signs at passive crossings "should be limited to unusual conditions." One of the factors that study is supposed to weigh is "the line of sight to approaching rail traffic."

That's why the change recommended at Church Road matters as a general lesson. Switching a yield to a stop isn't a cosmetic swap. It reflects a judgment that drivers can't count on seeing a train in time while rolling toward the tracks.

What Nebraska law asks of the driver

At a yield-sign crossing, Nebraska doesn't require every driver to come to a full stop every time. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,170, the stop duty kicks in at a passive crossing when an approaching train is audible from roughly a quarter mile away or "plainly visible and in hazardous proximity to such crossing." When it applies, the driver must stop "within fifty feet but not less than fifteen feet from the nearest rail" and wait until it's safe.

Read that closely and you'll see the problem. At a yield-sign crossing, the driver's legal duty depends on whether the train can be seen or heard. If brush, a rise in the road, or darkness keeps it out of view, the rule that's supposed to protect the driver depends on the very thing the crossing doesn't offer.

A stop sign changes that. Under § 60-6,171, NDOT and local authorities may designate "particularly dangerous highway grade crossings of railroads" and put up stop signs, and every driver must then stop and "proceed only upon exercising due care." Section 60-6,170 also bars driving around a closed gate, but at a passive crossing there's no gate to obey.

The court notes on the 60-6,170 page include Crewdson v. Burlington Northern R. Co. (1990). There, Nebraska's Supreme Court treated a driver's reasonable excuse for not seeing a train, such as an obstruction, as a question for the jury to decide. "He should have seen it" doesn't always end the case.

Who decides a crossing gets upgraded, and who pays

Families usually assume the railroad simply decides on its own. In practice, three groups are involved.

The federal money. The KOLN article doesn't name the federal program behind the Church Road funding. The main federal source for this kind of work is the railway-highway crossings program in 23 U.S.C. § 130, often called "Section 130." Under that statute:

• Each state must "conduct and systematically maintain a survey of all highways" to find crossings that need safety work and schedule projects. At a minimum, the schedule must "provide signs for all railway-highway crossings."
• The statute sets aside not less than $245,000,000 a year for fiscal years 2022 through 2026 for crossing hazards and protective devices.
• For projects paid from that set-aside, the federal share "shall be 100 percent."
• If a project benefits the railroad, the railroad's share is capped and "shall in no case exceed 10 per centum."

The state and local road authorities. NDOT and local authorities have the power under § 60-6,171 to designate dangerous crossings for stop signs. In the Church Road records KOLN described, it was NDOT that held the federal funding and sent the contract.

The railroad. The railroad owns the track the crossing sits on. At Church Road, the contract for the upgrade went to Union Pacific, and as of October 6 it hadn't been signed.

In any crossing case, I want the whole timeline: when the crossing was flagged, when money arrived, when the site visit happened, and where the paperwork went next. A long gap proves nothing by itself; delays can have real engineering or scheduling reasons. But the timeline exists on paper.

The vegetation rule most people never hear about

My page on sight lines and maintenance covers the federal vegetation rule and seasonal problems like corn and snow berms. There's also a Nebraska rule worth knowing.

NDOT's crossing rules, 415 Neb. Admin. Code ch. 6, § 005, split maintenance at public crossings. Under § 005.01C, the railroad or track owner "shall treat, mow or remove any vegetation" within 300 feet of the edge of the crossing measured along the railroad, and 50 feet from the outside track or to the right-of-way line, whichever is less. The public road authority is responsible for the part of the sight triangle that lies entirely within its own right of way. It also maintains the traffic control devices at the crossing.

Hills are different. A mowing crew can't fix a rise in the road; regrading is a construction project needing contracts, money and coordination. When brush and terrain both block the view, the vegetation duty and the design question have to be analyzed separately.

How preemption fits in, briefly

My main railroad crossing page explains federal preemption, which can bar some claims that warning devices were inadequate, depending on how they were funded and installed. How that applies to an upgrade that was funded but never built is a fact-specific question I won't guess at here. It's one more reason the funding records matter.

The records that tell the story

The KOLN reporting came from public records, which shows how much of a crossing's history is on paper. In a crossing case, I go after these early:

• State project records. Nebraska's public records law, § 84-712, opens public records to "all residents of this state and all other persons interested," and a written request has to be answered within four business days of receipt. Project files, diagnostic-visit notes, contracts and correspondence can all show what was known and when.
• The locomotive event recorder. Under 49 CFR § 229.135, a train running faster than 30 miles per hour must have an event recorder in the lead locomotive, recording at least the most recent 48 hours of operation, including speed, braking and "horn control handle activation." After a reportable accident, the railroad must preserve that data for FRA analysis, but the requirement "shall expire one (1) year after the date of the accident" unless federal investigators ask for more time.
• Horn timing. Under 49 CFR § 222.21, the standard pattern at a public crossing is two long blasts, one short and one long, starting at least 15 but no more than 20 seconds before the train reaches the crossing and continuing "until the locomotive occupies the crossing." For trains going faster than 60 mph, it can't start more than a quarter mile out. Recorder data shows whether that happened.
• Forward-facing video, if equipped.
• Collision-day photos from the driver's eye height, before anything is mowed, graded or re-signed.

A hypothetical: same crossing, two arguments

This is a made-up example, not a real case or any crash in the news. During harvest, a driver hauling grain approaches a yield-sign crossing on a county road in the late afternoon. A shelterbelt of cedars and a row of parked equipment block the view to the east. A train comes from that direction and hits the truck's trailer.

The railroad's argument: the yield sign told him to look, the law required him to stop if a train was visible, the horn blew, and he didn't stop. The family's answer starts with measurements. Where was the first spot a driver could actually see down the track, and how many seconds did that give him at a normal speed? What do the event recorder and horn data show? Was the vegetation inside the zone the railroad had to clear under § 005.01C? Did the state's own files flag this crossing as needing a stop sign?

If the train couldn't be seen until too late, "he should have looked" loses its force.

Wrongful death and comparative fault

When a crossing collision is fatal, Nebraska's wrongful death statute, § 30-810, requires the case to be brought by the personal representative and "commenced within two years after the death of such person." My post on who can sue and who receives the money and my wrongful death page explain how that works. If a public body may share responsibility, much shorter notice deadlines can apply. My statute of limitations guide covers those.

Fault gets divided, too. Under § 25-21,185.09, a claimant's own negligence "shall diminish proportionately" the damages, and recovery is barred if that negligence is "equal to or greater than the total negligence of all persons against whom recovery is sought." In a crossing case, every percentage point the railroad can shift to the driver lowers the recovery, which is why visibility evidence matters so much.

Why families trust me with crossing cases

A crossing case is about engineering records, federal regulations and evidence that disappears fast. I build every case as if it's going to trial, and I fight hard for the people I represent. Over the years I've recovered more than $23 million for injured people and their families, with a top result of $5.4 million. Clients have left many five-star reviews, and my firm was voted Best of Omaha for Personal Injury Law Firm in 2025 and 2026.

If someone you love was hurt or killed at a Nebraska railroad crossing, get an independent look at what happened before the scene changes. Call me at (402) 378-9208 or reach me through my contact form. The first consultation is free, and you won't owe a fee unless I win.

Frequently asked questions

Does Nebraska require drivers to stop at a yield-sign railroad crossing?

At a yield-sign crossing, Nebraska doesn't require every driver to come to a full stop every time. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-6,170, the stop duty kicks in at a passive crossing when an approaching train is audible from roughly a quarter mile away or "plainly visible and in hazardous proximity to such crossing."

Who is responsible for clearing vegetation at a Nebraska railroad crossing?

Under § 005.01C, the railroad or track owner "shall treat, mow or remove any vegetation" within 300 feet of the edge of the crossing measured along the railroad, and 50 feet from the outside track or to the right-of-way line, whichever is less. The public road authority is responsible for the part of the sight triangle that lies entirely within its own right of way.

How long does a family have to bring a wrongful death claim after a fatal crossing crash?

When a crossing collision is fatal, Nebraska's wrongful death statute, § 30-810, requires the case to be brought by the personal representative and "commenced within two years after the death of such person." If a public body may share responsibility, much shorter notice deadlines can apply.

Your Attorney

Frank Younes

Every page on this site is written by Frank Younes, a Nebraska trial attorney with a published record of verdicts and settlements, selection to the National Trial Lawyers Top 100, and a practice that covers every county in Nebraska and Iowa. No case is handed to an associate — the lawyer you read here is the lawyer who works your case.

More about Frank → · Free consultation: (402) 378-9208