Ryan Pettway Sues Boyd Gaming Corp and Railroad After Train Accident Causes Partial Amputations of Right Leg and Left Foot

A negligence lawsuit filed in Clark County civil court has brought renewed attention to safety responsibilities surrounding casino-adjacent infrastructure in downtown Las Vegas. Ryan Pettway, a California resident, has sued Boyd Gaming Corp., the operator of the Main Street Station hotel-casino, and Union Pacific Railroad Corp., alleging that their failure to properly secure access to active train tracks led to a catastrophic accident that permanently altered his life. According to the complaint, Pettway was struck by a freight train after entering railroad property through a damaged fence, resulting in the partial amputation of his right leg and left foot.

The lawsuit, filed on December 26, outlines a chain of events that Pettway claims could have been prevented had the defendants adequately maintained a barrier designed to keep the public away from the Union Pacific tracks running alongside the casino. The filing seeks more than $75,000 in damages and alleges that both corporate defendants knew or should have known that the fence was compromised and posed a serious risk to anyone in the area.

Details of the Accident and Allegations in the Lawsuit

According to court documents, the incident occurred on December 27, 2023, near the rear of the Main Street Station hotel-casino, a property owned and operated by Boyd Gaming Corp. The casino sits adjacent to active Union Pacific railroad tracks, which are separated from public access areas by a fence. Pettway’s complaint alleges that this fence had a significant hole that had not been repaired despite being visible and known.

The lawsuit claims that the purpose of the fence was to prevent members of the public from entering railroad property, where active freight trains regularly pass. However, Pettway alleges that the unrepaired opening effectively nullified this safety measure. On the day of the incident, he reportedly followed other individuals through the gap in the fence and onto Union Pacific property. Shortly thereafter, he was struck by a passing freight train.

As a result of the collision, Pettway suffered severe and life-altering injuries. The complaint states that the impact led to traumatic injuries requiring the partial amputation of his right leg and his left foot. In addition to the immediate physical trauma, the filing asserts that Pettway will likely face a future marked by ongoing medical treatment, major surgeries, rehabilitation, and long-term care needs. The lawsuit further alleges that there were clear signs indicating that the fence breach was being regularly used as an access point.

Read : Top Ten Biggest National Parks Around the World

The complaint cites what it describes as “obvious indications of homeless people and encampments on the other side” of the barrier as evidence that the opening had existed long enough to put property owners and operators on notice. Pettway’s legal team argues that this activity should have alerted Boyd Gaming and Union Pacific to the danger posed by the compromised fence and prompted timely repairs or additional security measures.

Claims Against Boyd Gaming and Union Pacific Railroad

Ryan Pettway’s lawsuit places responsibility on both Boyd Gaming Corp. and Union Pacific Railroad Corp., asserting that each had a duty to maintain safe conditions in and around their respective properties. The complaint alleges that Boyd Gaming, as the casino operator, failed to ensure that the perimeter of its property was adequately secured to prevent patrons and others from accessing the nearby railroad tracks. At the same time, Union Pacific is accused of failing to safeguard its railroad property from unauthorized entry, despite the known risks associated with active freight lines.

Read : Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Sued Over 12-Year-Old Boy Losing Foot During Church-Organized Trip

The filing claims that both defendants either knew or should have known that the fence was damaged and that people were using the opening to access the tracks. By allegedly failing to repair the hole, reinforce the barrier, or otherwise restrict access, the lawsuit contends that the companies created or allowed a hazardous condition to persist. Pettway’s attorneys argue that this negligence directly contributed to the circumstances that led to the train strike.

In addition to compensatory damages for past and future medical expenses, the lawsuit seeks punitive damages and compensation for other losses, which may include pain and suffering, loss of earning capacity, and diminished quality of life. While the monetary threshold cited in the complaint exceeds $75,000, the actual amount sought could increase significantly as the case proceeds and damages are more fully assessed.

Both defendants have responded cautiously in public statements. A spokesperson for Boyd Gaming Corp. told The Independent that the company does not comment on pending litigation. Union Pacific Railroad similarly stated that it had not yet received the lawsuit at the time of inquiry and does not comment on active litigation. However, the railroad emphasized its broader safety message, noting that the safety of the communities in which it operates is a top priority and reminding the public to use only designated crossings and to stay off railroad tracks at all times.

Broader Safety and Legal Implications

The case highlights longstanding concerns about safety at the intersection of commercial properties and active transportation infrastructure, particularly in urban environments like downtown Las Vegas. Railroads have long been recognized as inherently dangerous areas due to the speed, size, and limited stopping ability of trains. For this reason, property owners and rail operators are typically expected to implement and maintain barriers, signage, and other measures to prevent unauthorized access.

Read : Family of 42-Year-Old Kevin Lee Duncan Sues The Boathouse After He Choked to Death on Steak Dinner at Disney World

From a legal perspective, Pettway’s claims rest on principles of premises liability and negligence. To prevail, his legal team will need to demonstrate that the defendants owed him a duty of care, that they breached that duty by failing to maintain the fence, and that this breach was a proximate cause of his injuries. The allegation that the fence had been damaged for some time, combined with claims of visible encampments and foot traffic, is central to the argument that the hazard was foreseeable and should have been addressed.

The involvement of a major casino operator also raises questions about how hospitality and entertainment venues manage the safety of areas that, while not intended for guests, are adjacent to high-risk zones. Casinos often attract large volumes of foot traffic, including tourists unfamiliar with the surrounding environment. Plaintiffs in similar cases have argued that this increases the responsibility of property operators to ensure that boundaries are clear and secure.

Union Pacific’s public statement underscores the tension often present in such cases between corporate safety messaging and individual incidents. Railroads routinely stress that trains can come from either direction at any time and that pedestrians should never walk on or near tracks. However, courts have sometimes found that such warnings do not absolve companies of responsibility if physical barriers are inadequate or poorly maintained.

For Pettway, the lawsuit represents not only a bid for financial compensation but also an attempt to assign accountability for an accident that has left him with permanent disabilities. The long-term consequences of partial amputations typically include extensive rehabilitation, potential complications, and profound impacts on daily life and employment.

The complaint’s assertion that he will require ongoing major surgeries and long-term care underscores the lasting nature of the harm he alleges. As the case moves forward in Clark County civil court, it may prompt closer scrutiny of safety practices at properties bordering active rail lines in Las Vegas and beyond.

While the defendants have declined to discuss the specifics due to the pending litigation, the outcome could influence how similar properties address fence maintenance, security monitoring, and coordination between private businesses and railroad operators. The legal proceedings will ultimately determine whether the alleged failures constituted negligence under Nevada law and whether Pettway is entitled to the damages he seeks.