Legal Concepts in Truck Accident Cases

Truck Accidents Caused by Government Agencies, Employees, or Contractors

February 24, 2017 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

After any accident, an injured motorist and any passengers are entitled to file a personal injury lawsuit against the party they believe to be at fault for causing the accident. In many cases involving private citizens named as defendants, the process is a fairly straightforward one, requiring only that the motorcyclist prove that the defendant’s negligence caused their injuries. However, when the at-fault party is a government employee or contractor, there may be issues of immunity that must be overcome.

As a general rule, government agencies and their employees are entitled to immunity from personal injury lawsuits arising out of any actions related to the performance of a government function. While this seems like an extremely broad grant of immunity, the reality is that there are many exceptions to the general rule. For example, if a government employee is acting recklessly or is in violation of the law at the time of the accident, immunity will not likely attach.

Even if government immunity is not likely given the circumstances of the accident, it is advisable that anyone injured by a government employee contact a dedicated personal injury attorney prior to filing a case. For example, plaintiffs filing lawsuits against government agencies and their employees generally must comply with additional procedural requirements or risk that their case is prematurely dismissed.

Court Reversed Default Judgment Against Allegedly Negligent Truck Driver

February 3, 2017 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, an appellate court in Alabama issued a written opinion discussing the situations when a court should issue a default judgment when a defendant in a lawsuit fails to respond to the plaintiff’s claim. In the recent case, the appellate court ultimately reversed a lower court’s default judgment after applying a multi-factor test.

The Facts of the Case

The defendant, a semi-truck driver, was backing a load of logs into his driveway when the plaintiff crashed into his truck. At the time of the accident, the truck was blocking all of the lanes of travel. The plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, which the defendant failed to answer. After approximately three months, the court issued a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

Two months after the default judgment was entered, the defendant submitted a motion to the court, asking it to set aside the judgment. In support of his motion, the defendant submitted an affidavit from a witness to the accident, stating that the defendant had taken reasonable precautions, including placing cones and using the truck’s four-way flashing lights. The defendant also claimed that, on the day of the accident, he notified his insurance company about the accident. The defendant explained that he thought this meant that the insurance company was investigating the accident and that no further action was needed on his part. The trial court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed.

SUV Driver Injured When Tractor-Trailer Attempts Illegal Turn

September 14, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

According to a recent article, a driver was severely injured on a highway in Maine last month in an accident involving a tractor-trailer. The injured driver was driving behind the tractor-trailer in an SUV when the truck unexpectedly slowed and tried to turn around in a vehicle turnout reserved for police and other government vehicles. The injured driver swerved to avoid crashing into the rear of the tractor-trailer, but he lost control of the vehicle and crashed anyway. In the article, the Maine State Police stated that the driver of the truck faces criminal charges for endangering the life of another driver.

In Maryland, drivers who cause a serious bodily injury to other drivers may face criminal charges. Drivers may also be liable for damages in civil court if the driver is found to be negligent. A driver is negligent if he or she fails to take reasonable care while operating a motor vehicle, and this failure causes an injury to another person.

Maryland law provides for two types of damages. Economic damages compensate injured drivers or passengers for out-of-pocket costs like lost wages, unpaid medical expenses, and decreased future earnings. Non-economic damages, which are sometimes referred to as damages for “pain and suffering,” are also available to injured parties who can no longer enjoy life as they did before being injured.

Evidence of Repeated Safety Violations May Be Relevant in Maryland Truck Accident Cases

July 21, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Semi-trucks and other commercial vehicles and the employees operating them are required to abide by various safety regulations and guidelines that may not apply to normal drivers. Companies and drivers can be cited by state transportation authorities if an inspection or accident reveals violations of the driving or equipment regulations established by the authorities. Companies or drivers with repeated or excessive violations may face administrative consequences, especially in the event of an accident related to the violation.

The Role of Previous Safety Violations in an Accident Lawsuit

The victims of a Maryland semi-truck accident may discover that the commercial vehicle or driver involved in their crash has been cited in the past for a safety violation that relates to the apparent cause of their own accident. As the plaintiff in a Maryland truck accident lawsuit, the accident victim may be able to introduce evidence of previous safety violations to demonstrate the defendant’s negligence in causing the accident. Evidence that a defendant has repeatedly violated safety regulations in the past should give the plaintiff an advantage in making the case for damages. However, this evidence will not necessarily be admitted without litigation over its admission.

Punitive Damages and a Pattern of Gross Negligence in Maryland and D.C.

In some jurisdictions, an accident victim may be entitled to additional damages above and beyond the economic and noneconomic damages relating to their injuries from the accident. In Maryland, punitive damages may only be awarded in a negligence lawsuit by showing actual malice, but in Washington, D.C., punitive damages can be awarded when a defendant has acted in willful disregard of the plaintiff’s rights and was reckless toward the plaintiff’s safety. In some cases, it could be argued that a pattern of gross negligence by a defendant who was guilty of repeated safety violations that resulted in an accident justifies an award of punitive damages to the plaintiff.

Plaintiffs in Truck Accident Case Allowed to Proceed in Product Liability Case against Manufacturer of Allegedly Faulty Vehicle

May 25, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of New Mexico issued a written opinion holding that the statute of limitations in a product liability case filed against a car manufacturer may be tolled if there is a showing that the manufacturer fraudulently concealed information that could give rise to the claim. In the case, Estate of Brice v. Toyota Motor Company, the court reversed a trial court’s ruling that the plaintiff’s case was filed beyond the applicable statute of limitations and allowed the case to proceed toward trial.

The Facts of the Case

Back in 2006, a Toyota Corolla driven by Alice Brice inexplicably accelerated into an intersection, where it was struck by a semi-truck. The vehicle caught fire, and Brice ultimately died as a result of the injuries she sustained. Approximately three years and 11 months later, her estate filed a product liability lawsuit against Toyota, the manufacturer of her vehicle.

In a summary judgment motion, Toyota asked the court to dismiss the case against it, arguing that it was filed too late. Under New Mexico law, wrongful death actions of this sort must be filed within three years from the date of the death. The plaintiff responded that Toyota had known about the sudden-acceleration problem but had acted to conceal the safety issue, preventing the plaintiff from realizing that there was a potential claim. The plaintiff also explained that as soon as the information became available, the lawsuit was filed without delay.

Truck Accident Case Dismissed Based on Lack of Reliable Evidence of Negligence

April 13, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

In most personal injury cases, the judge plays a fairly limited role, leaving the ultimate decision of whether the defendant was liable for the plaintiff’s injuries up to the jury. In the early stages of litigation, a judge also acts as a gatekeeper, ensuring that only meritorious cases reach the jury. If a party asks the judge to dismiss the case based on a lack of evidence, and the judge agrees, a case may get dismissed before it is even put before a jury. That is exactly what happened in a recent wrongful death case involving an allegedly negligent truck driver.

Moreno v. TLSL: The Facts

In the case of Moreno v. TLSL, the plaintiff brought a wrongful death case on behalf of a man who was killed when the pickup truck he was driving slammed into the back of a semi-truck. In pre-trial depositions, several parties provided the court with testimony. After that process was complete, the defendant asked the court to dismiss the case, based on there not being any evidence of his being negligent.

The parties presented wildly different versions of what had occurred. The semi-truck driver testified that he merged onto the highway when he saw the deceased’s headlights in his mirrors. He estimated that the vehicle was about three-quarters of a mile behind him at the time he entered the highway. However, the vehicle behind him quickly approached and eventually crashed into the back of his truck. The truck driver guessed he was going at about 35 miles per hour when the collision occurred.

Virginia Semi-Truck Accident Claims One Man’s Life

July 14, 2015 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month in Carroll County, Virginia, one man was killed when he was involved in a semi-truck accident. According to one local news source, the accident took place around eight in the morning in the southbound lanes of Interstate 77, near mile marker 22.

Evidently, the semi-truck was towing two trailers and traveling in the northbound lanes when the driver lost control of the vehicle. As the driver attempted to regain control, the truck crossed over the median and entered into the northbound lanes. The large truck and two trailers then tipped over in the middle of the highway. A passing Chevrolet Aveo was unable to avoid the truck in the middle of the road and collided with the second of the truck’s trailers.

The driver of the semi-truck sustained fatal injuries in the accident and was pronounced dead at the scene by emergency responders. The driver of the Chevrolet Aveo sustained minor injuries and was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment. She is expected to make a full recovery. Police have not determined what the cause of the fatal truck accident was, but an investigation is ongoing.

Truck Accident Victim Permitted to Name Trucking Company and Vehicle Owner in Personal Injury Lawsuit

February 18, 2015 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this year in a California appellate court, a plaintiff’s case was allowed to continue over objections from several defendants after the plaintiff was involved in a serious tractor-trailer accident. According to court documents, the plaintiff was riding in the sleeper cabin of the tractor-trailer when the driver got into an accident. The plaintiff suffered serious injuries as a result.

The plaintiff then sought financial damages from the driver of the truck, the truck’s owner, and the owner of the trailer that the truck was towing at the time.

At Trial Two Defendants Are Excused Based on a Lack of Vicarious Liability

The trial court accepted the argument of both the trucking company as well as the trailer owner that they should not be held vicariously liable for the actions of the truck driver. This was based largely on the fact that the actual driver of the truck was merely an independent contractor, rather than a benefited employee.

Baltimore County Accident Between Car and Box Truck Results in Vehicle Crashing into Nearby Building

February 11, 2015 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month in Baltimore County, an accident between a box truck and a car sent the truck into a nearby building. According to an article by the Baltimore Sun, the accident occurred on Hanover Pike near Emory Road in Upperco at around 10 in the morning.

Evidently, the truck was heading north and the car was heading south on Hanover Pike when the two collided. After the collision, the box truck careened into a nearby building. Thankfully, the building was abandoned, and no one was inside at the time. Hazmat crews did survey the scene and ended up removing some potentially hazardous fuel from the scene.

It is not clear what caused the two vehicles to collide, but both drivers were trapped in their respective vehicles until emergency responders arrived and were able to extricate them. Both of the drivers were injured and flown to Maryland Shock Trauma after they were removed from their vehicles.

Could Wal-Mart Be at Fault for the Crash that Injured Tracy Morgan and Killed Another Comedian?

July 22, 2014 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this year, actor and comedian Tracy Morgan was involved in a serious car accident on the New Jersey Turnpike. The accident, which occurred late at night, critically injured Morgan and killed his good friend and fellow comedian, James McNair.

The driver of the semi truck that hit Morgan’s limousine was an employee of Wal-Mart and was driving a Wal-Mart truck at the time of the accident. A post-accident investigation uncovered that the driver had not slept for the 24 hours prior to the accident and had traveled more than 700 miles over the course of that day. The driver is facing criminal charges for his involvement in the accident.

Recently, some people are wondering if Wal-Mart should share the blame with the driver. In fact, victims of the crash have named both the driver of the truck, as well as Wal-Mart, as defendants that they claim are responsible for their injuries and losses. As one recent article points out, the National Transportation Safety Bureau is conducting an investigation into the accident, but has not announced the result yet. Until then, people are speculating on how Wal-Mart could have prevented such a tragic accident.