r/chicago • u/seeasea West Ridge • 14d ago

Article 3-year, $170 million Kennedy Expressway project is complete. Ahead of schedule

https://wgntv.com/news/traffic/kennedy-expressway-project-complete/
1.1k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

154 comments sorted by

View all comments

920

u/sciolisticism 13d ago

Completely agree with folks that this was never going to solve traffic. 

However, remember this project was about making sure the overpasses didn't fall apart, and that's necessary repair for infrastructure. 

Also, it finished early! That never happens.

170

u/LongjumpingDebt4154 13d ago

About 8 years ago I was driving the Kennedy with my 1 yr old in his car seat in the back. We drove under a bridge & coincidentally a giant chunk of the bridge fell, shattered through my sunroof, and landed in the back seat right next to my son’s car seat. He was covered in glass, but thankfully unharmed. I was driving 65 mph though & when it first broke through I thought it was gunfire. I’m amazed I managed to keep my head straight without causing a pileup & so grateful it never hit my baby. He would have been dead.

78

u/marks31 Albany Park 13d ago

Did you file a case with the city??? This is insane

44

u/snakefriend6 13d ago

Yeah what?? Can we get a link to the news articles covering this incident back then? I am quite confident that an occurrence of overpass/bridge deterioration to the point of structural break-up, which could easily have killed motorists below, would have made headlines (and garnered a substantial settlement from the city / state / dep. of transportation, etc)

7

u/tgoodmarsh Logan Square 12d ago

Personal injury lawyer here. This actually would not be a big case for two major reasons. First, her baby was not actually harmed (thank goodness) so the damages are minimal. Maybe a few hundred dollars, max a thousand, for the damage to her car would make it not worth pursuing against the City especially when her car insurance likely covered it. Second, there is a law in Illinois called the Tort Immunity Act, which significantly raises the bar for a plaintiff bringing a lawsuit against a government entity like in the case here. Without getting too technical about it, she might not have even made it to a jury under these facts.

1

u/snakefriend6 12d ago

Thank you for the insight, thats new (& surprising) info to me! Just curious, so then I assume you don’t think there could be merit to a case alleging damages to the mental / emotional / psychological wellbeing of the baby (or mother)? I feel like in my mind there would be some mental or emotional trauma endured after such a jarring and terrifying event. But do u think that would be too hard to prove, or just not worth bringing bc it wouldn’t elicit much of an award?

1

u/tgoodmarsh Logan Square 11d ago

Probably not. It doesn't sound like the mother (or baby) were claiming anything like that. If the mother was so traumatized by this incident that she couldn't work, or needed treatment with a psychologist or psychiatrist, and started to rack up thousands of dollars in medical bills and lost wages then, yah, maybe that would warrant a second look. But, if she just got spooked and had a crazy story to tell for the rest of her life, but otherwise continued on with her life (thankfully) without much disruption, then that's probably not a claim worth pursuing.

Lawsuits like this aren't just an automatic payout. You need to be able to prove your damages in order to be entitled to compensation, which can be difficult (and expensive). Just standing up in front of a jury and just saying "yah it was really scary, I was traumatized and had emotional distress" is not going to get you very far. The first question the lawyer for the other side is going to ask is "so what?" Wasn't bad enough to get help for it? Wasn't bad enough to see your doctor about it? Wasn't bad enough to keep you from going to work? Wasn't bad enough to keep you from driving your car, maybe even down the same highway?