Every now and then, the roll signs indicating a subway route are wrong. I often see an Orange Q, a remnant of the Manhattan Bridge work, instead of a Yellow Q bullet as the trains head past me. That is, generally, the most egregious of minor errors.

Earlier this week, Second Ave. Sagas reader Jeffrey P drew my attention to the above sign on a Manhattan-bound 1 train. The 1, which shares rolling stock with the 3 and 4, was mislabeled but not as a train in service. It was bulleted as a 13 train. It certainly piqued my curiosity.

In the annals of New York City subway history, the only train designated by the number 13 was the pre-1967 BMT 14th St./Canarsie Line, now better known as the L train. At no point did the IRT lines — today’s current numbered lines — make use of a 13. Maybe one day, the future holds a red 13 for New York City straphangers.

Jeffrey sent me this picture via Twitter. For another view of this mysterious 13 train, click here. Be sure to check out and follow Second Ave. Sagas on Twitter if that’s your thing.

In the annals of New York City public transit, the egregious law suits make the headlines. In February, for instance, the MTA came out on the wrong end of a case when a jury awarded $2.3 million to a man who lost a leg after falling onto the tracks with a BAC twice the legal limit. In April, a victim of a bus accident won over $27 million.

It seems that those cases — the ones that make the headlines — represent the tip of a large iceberg. Last year, the MTA spent around $57.6 million on personal injury claims. That total, which comes out of the agency’s operating budget, has increased by over $20 million since 2004, and the MTA wants to put an end to these injury claims. The Post’s Tom Namako has more on the suits:

The chronically cash-strapped MTA has become a money train for riders filing personal-injury lawsuits, forcing taxpayers to dole out tens of millions of dollars a year. The payouts come from the MTA’s day-to-day operating budget, which recently got a $1.6 billion bailout for 2009.

About 2,750 claims are filed every year, from people taking a simple spill while on MTA property to bone-headed buffoons who try — and fail — to outrun subway trains, said Martin Schnabel, NYC Transit’s chief lawyer.

“There are a small, but not insignificant, number of cases every year of people intentionally on the tracks coming into contact with trains,” Schnabel said.

Per Namako, the MTA Audit Committee has isolated this area of liability as a source of lost MTA revenue. According to a recent committee report, the MTA is currently facing 7800 lawsuits and receives around 3000 claims a year.

While juries tend to look favorably upon the MTA — 96 out of 150 jury decisions last year were in favor of the transit authority — agency lawyers would like to see Albany ban suits from those who “get themselves into dangerous situations.” In other words, if another Dustin Dibble is too drunk to stay on the platform, the MTA would prefer not to be liable for his injuries.

As an aspiring law student, transit advocate and tax- and fare-paying subway rider, I can certainly appreciate where the MTA is coming from on this issue. At a time when the agency is facing an extreme cash shortage and fares will soon be going up, they don’t want to be liable for the stupidity and irresponsibility of their riders.

The question centers around limiting liability. How can the MTA block these lawsuits from the get-go? Right now, if the MTA is not at fault, a jury would decide it so. The authority would still incur costs of litigation, and those mount up substantially over time. If Albany is serious about reining in MTA spending, tort reform would certainly be an interesting starting place. I don’t think our state legislature is spoiling for that fight though.