Georgia Truck Accident Attorney Blog

A Florida truck driver admitted that he was on his cell phone yesterday when he slammed into a school bus, killing a 13-year-old student. According to reports, the school bus, which had stopped to let children off , had its warning lights on and stop signs out. The truck failed to stop for it and rammed the school bus forward 294 feet.

See our recent posts on cell phone distractions and the absence of seat belts on busses.

Continue reading " Florida truck driver on cell phone hits school bus, kills child " »

Over the road truck driving is a tough job that a lot of folks find less desirable than construction jobs and other work that allows them to be home every night. A couple of years ago, when the economy was better, I wrote about the shortage of truck drivers that led trucking companies to improve benefits and recruit nontraditional sources of truck driving labor such as women, retirees and especially Hispanics.

Now, however, with the economy in the tank, the trucking industry is systematically recruiting displaced auto workers.

Maybe next trucking companies will start recruiting displaced investment bankers on Wall Street who will be hard pressed to find corporate jobs in finance. Anybody who can handle a trading desk should be able to handle the cab of a tractor trailer.

Continue reading " Trucking companies recruiting displaced auto workers. Are investment bankers next? " »

Here's a roundup of recent news stories about truck accident jury verdicts around the United States:

- $87 million in Dallas, Texas, for a man paralyzed in a wreck in a U-Haul truck had faulty emergency break and worn down gears.

- $36.3 million ($23.1 million compensatory damages, $13.5 million in punitive damages) in Phoenix, Arizona, for death of father of 8 who was killed when a tractor trailer drove 65 mph across three sets of rumble strips designed to warn of an approaching stop sign, ran the stop sign, and crashed into his SUV. The truck driver's logs, which are required by federal regulations to document compliance with hours of service rules, were "lost." The truck driver had no explanation why he failed to slow down. The jury apparently figured out that the trucking company "lost" the driver logs to conceal a pattern of violating fatigue prevention regulations, as it awarded $13.5 million in punitive damages on top of the $23.1 million in compensatory damages.

- $29.4 million for wrongful death and personal injury in Orange County, NY. The crash occurred on Jan. 25, 2002, when a freight container on a northbound flatbed trailer smashed into the bottom of the Pleasant Hill Road overpass. A family SUV en route to a ski vacation swerved to avoid the wreckage of the exploding container and was broadsided by another tractor-trailer. The father in the SUV suffered fatal internal injuries and the teenage daughter was also injured.

- $20.1 Million verdict in Clayton County, Georgia, for wrongful death of a 62 year old school teacher who suffered broken ribs when he was rear-ended by an electrical supply truck while stopped at a red light. While hospitalized he developed complications, aspirated and died.

- $11.23 million verdict in Nebraska for man struck by tractor trailer in dense fog on icy interstate highway, reduced by 20% for comparative negligence.

- $5.64 million verdict in El Centro, California in case where farm truck ran stop sign and struck family minivan. A 15 year old girl in the van suffered facial avulsion degloving (that is, the flesh of her face was torn off), and several fractures to her face and skull.

Continue reading " Recent trucking accident jury verdicts " »

As a "seasoned" Georgia trial lawyer, I've seen considerable evolution of thinking about safety issues. When I was a young Assistant District Attorney, we occasionally prosecuted DUI cases but still treated them lightly, still laughing at bad jokes about drunks. Then our consciousness was raised by news stories about carnage caused by drunk drivers. Judges, prosecutors and legislators rightly began to take drunk driving more seriously. The term "designated driver" was not in the vocabulary when I was in college, but it is assumed as a necessity in my kids' generation.

When cell phones and then text messaging came along, a lot of folks just figured they could drive as safely talking on a cell phone as talking to a passenger. A couple of years ago we began to see reports of studies showing that driving while talking on a cell phone was as dangerous as driving drunk and that text messaging while driving is an even bigger distraction.

Now we learn that the train wreck in the LA area that killed 25 and injured 130 occurred when the train engineer missed a signal light while text messaging with teenage train enthusiasts. This may be the consciousness raising event that leads to changes in laws and enforcement practices comparable to what we saw a quarter century ago about driving while intoxicated.

Current state laws about cell phone use and text messaging while driving include:
* Handheld cell phones: California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Washington, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands have banned driving while talking on handheld cell phones.
* Text Messaging: Alaska, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey and Washington have a text messaging ban for all drivers.
* Novice Drivers: 17 states and the District of Columbia restrict all cell phone use by novice drivers.
* School Bus Drivers: In 16 states and the District of Columbia, school bus drivers are prohibited from all cell phone use when passengers are present, except for in emergencies.
* Other rules: Some cities, such as Phoenix and Detroit, have cell phone laws, but nine states have preemption laws that prohibit local jurisdictions from enacting restrictions. Utah and New Hampshire treat cell phone use as a larger distracted driving issue.

In the wake of the LA commuter train tragedy, my hunch is that legislators in states around the country will pass more laws requiring use of hands free devices when talking on cell phones while driving and banning text messaging while driving. Most any call phone user who does not now have a Bluetooth or other hands-free device in the car will do so within the next couple of years.

In auto and truck accident litigation, we have already become even more diligent and aggressive about discovery of cell phone and text messaging records. With heightened sophistication about electronic discovery, this will be an increasingly significant factor in lawsuits.

There are at least three potential uses of cell and text evidence:

1. The defendant's cell phone and text usage while driving may be considered "conscious indifference to consequences" sufficient to support an award of punitive damages, similar to drunk driving.

2. The plaintiff's cell phone usage at the time of the incident may be used as comparative negligence evidence to reduce or eliminate a damages award.

3. If the evidence reveals that a defendant driver was communicating with an employer, or to a customer on the employer's business, then the employer and its insurance policy may be drawn into the case.

Continue reading " Accident litigation increasingly focuses on cell phone and text messaging distraction issues " »

On March 2, 2007, a tour bus carrying the baseball team from Bluffton University in Ohio crashed on an Atlanta freeway. I've been one of the team of attorneys in Ohio and Georgia working on representation of the team members.

One of the issues raised has been the lack of seat belts on buses in the United States.Some of the passengers were killed or seriously injured when ejected from the bus. The National Transportation Safety Board determined that contributing to the severity of the accident was "the motorcoach's lack of an adequate occupant protection system." Similar tragedies have occurred elsewhere around the country in recent years.

While the same bus purchased almost anywhere else in the world would have belts in all passenger seats, they are not typically found on buses in the U.S. because our federal regulations do not require them.

In 1968 when the National Transportation Safety Board first recommended that seat belts be required on all buses. Decades of deaths – many occur as passengers are tossed about and ejected from buses have led to decades of study and discussion, but no law.

In the wake of this tragedy in Georgia, as well as similar incidents in Texas, legislation was introduced in Congress to require passenger seat belts in tour buses in the United States. Last winter, U.S. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, and Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, introduced a bill to give safety proponents just what they wanted – a congressional end-run around the long-stalled seat-belt debate. They co-authored a bill calling for seat belts for passengers on new and old charter buses, and safety glass and stronger roofs on new buses. U.S. Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia introduced similar legislation in the House that would require seat belts, not just more studies.

However, as reported in an excellent article by Michael Lindenberger in the The Dallas Morning News, the chances of passage this year are fading due to strong opposition from the powerful lobby for bus operators. Lindenberger's article reports:

Ms. Hutchison and Mr. Brown submitted their bill Nov. 8. On Nov. 20, a political action committee for the American Bus Association sent a check for $1,000 to U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa. By early December, Mr. Shuster had his rival Bluffton University Motorcoach Safety Act before a House committee. He received another $1,000 early this year from the same PAC, and $1,000 more in June from the United Motorcoach Association.

"We welcome the Shuster bill because it calls for the most sweeping research and data collection in motor coach industry history," American Bus Association president and CEO Peter J. Pantuso said in a statement issued shortly after it was introduced.

The article goes on to explain at length the backroom machinations by which the bus industry lobbyists have continued to manipulate the process forty years after the NTSB first recommended requiring passenger seat belts on buses.

As I deal with evidence of the carnage in the Bluffton bus crash case, where bright young college athletes died horrific deaths that would have been prevented by something as simple as a seat belt and safety glass on the side windows to prevent them from being ejected from the bus, I marvel at the determination of the industry to block even the simplest safety measures for four decades.

Continue reading " Bus seat belt legislation stalled again, 40 years after NTSB first recommended seat belts on buses " »

I'm just a trucking accident trial lawyer in Georgia, and it's been over three decades since my last economics class in college. Therefore, even though I read the Wall Street Journal and Investors Business Daily more or less regularly, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that my blog post about implications of the economic crisis for trucking and insurance was cited as one of the best legal blog posts expressing insight on the ongoing economic calamity. My econ profs at Furman way back when would be astonished.

Continue reading " Georgia truck wreck lawyer comment cited among best blog posts about impact of Wall Street mess " »

At a trucking litigation seminar in New Orleans last spring, I had the opportunity to pinch hit for Allan J. Kam, who consults on federal motor carrier safety issues around the country.

Mr. Kam is the preeminent authority on how politicians and the trucking industry have blocked safety changes that have led to thousands of semi truck accident wrongful deaths and catastrophic serious injuries from underride accidents over the past 40 years.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has identified underride truck accidents as a major safety problem and proposed safety standards as far back as 1967. These safety standards, many of which have been in effect in Europe and Asia for years, would have prevented many unnecessary injuries and wrongful deaths. But it wasn’t until 1996 that some significantly weaker safety standards were finally enacted.

The battle over truck underride guards tells the story:

* In 1967, the NHTSA proposed rulemaking for truck underride guards, aiming make truck accidents less catastrophic.

* In 1969, the NHTSA proposed requiring a rear under guard to block vehicles from sliding underneath large tractor-trailers. The proposal was opposed by the trucking industry.

* In 1970, the NHTSA tried again, but with lower standards. Again, the industry opposed any new truck safety rules.

* In 1977, new calls were made for truck underride protection, due in part, to information showing the number of cars rear-ending the back-ends of large trucks was as high as 40,000, resulting in 300 wrongful deaths and nearly 9,000 personal injuries a year.

* In 1996, a much weaker truck underride safety rule was finally implemented.

Watch the video below to see startling truck underride accidents and safety precautions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmw0HIKgHiM

Unfortunately, thousands of people have been killed or seriously injured because of this 40-year delay. Those tragedies will continue because the safety standards are still too lenient.

Lawyers representing families of people seriously injured and killed in these underride truck accidents face great challenges in the courtroom proving that existing truck safety standards are actually minimum standards, which are watered down and the result of political compromise.

Continue reading " Truck underride -- an unnecessary continuing tragedy " »

As a lawyer handling catastrophic trucking accidents, I have repeatedly seen the deadly effects of driver fatigue as truckers are pushed beyond their physical limits by trucking companies and shippers.

Now the National Transportation Safety Board on Tuesday recommended that trucking companies and the government place increased emphasis on making sure truck drivers follow regulations governing proper rest. Additionally, officials at the NTSB recommended that the government should investigate the use of alarms and other devices to monitor drivers’ alertness. Experts estimate that fatigue is responsible for one in eight large-truck crashes.

The NTSB also called upon the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to step up enforcement of trucking companies, making sure their record-keeping is up to date and drivers are being given adequate time to rest.

Investigators also debated the use of technology designed to warn of impending collisions and automatically engage the brakes. They discussed concerns that automatic braking could interfere with the stability of large rigs, so the board recommended that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study the technology and mandate its use if it proves effective.

Continue reading " NTSB urges stronger enforcement of truck driver rest period rules " »

As a truck accident trial lawyer, I'm neither an economist nor an investment guru. However, I have ridden through a few economic cycles during my career.

Earlier I wrote about some of the short term implications of the current Wall Street debacles on trucking and insurance. I expect to see more corner cutting on trucking safety as companies deal with high fuel costs, more truckers failing to renew insurance policies above the minimum required by law, more small trucking companies failing, more consolidation in the trucking industry, and more insurance companies blaming trial lawyers and claimants for premium increases that really result from their investment losses.

As a result, we will probably see more bad truck accidents, more liability claims, more lawsuits, and as insurers try to avoid paying claims that they should settle, more substantial jury verdicts.

Some marginal insurers and self-insured trucking companies may go under, leaving claimants without recourse, as happened in the notorious Builders Transport bankruptcy a number in the early nineties. We lawyers who handle trucking cases will need to evaluate solvency of insurers more closely, as well as liability and damages, in screening cases.

That's the short term -- the next 3 to 5 years. But what will be the long-term effect over the next 8 to 10 years?

Consolidation of the trucking industry may result in more systematic safety management. While there are exceptions, larger trucking companies are able to have more professional management, screen their drivers, and supervise their fleets more competently with trained safety and risk managers, better technology, and satellite communications systems to monitor and manage drivers. That's not to say they are angels. They also have greater capacity for sophisticated mischief. Smaller trucking companies often lack sophisticated management, are more likely to hire marginal drivers, and are more prone to purchase minimum limits of insurance from shadier than average insurance companies.

Insurance coverage amounts may go up. Larger trucking companies have more to lose, and therefore typically carry more insurance than smaller trucking companies. Maybe it's mere wishful thinking, but perhaps there could even be an increase in the required minimum amounts of coverage to keep up with inflation and a tightening of criteria for self-insurance in the trucking industry.

Consolidation of inter-modal freight companies, combining rail and truck transport of containerized freight, will expand. They may maintain the appearance of separate entities to shield against liability.

There will be increased use of tandem trailers. Longer and heavier tractor-trailer combinations will almost certainly have adverse effects on highway safety.

The shortage of qualified truck drivers as Boomers reach retirement age will lead to hiring of more immigrant truck drivers and further relaxing of English language competency requirements. That has negative safety implications. Also look for revival of the proposal to open the US to Mexican trucking companies.

The defense of trucking accident cases will become even tougher. All large trucking companies deploy "rapid response teams" immediately after serious accidents, often arriving before the debris is cleared. Their skill in securing favorable evidence and "losing" bad evidence is amazing. With consolidation of the industry, I expect their ability to control evidence while victims are still in the emergency room will become even more pronounced.

Continue reading " Trucking accidents and insurance - longer term implications of the current credit crisis " »

As a truck accident trial lawyer in Atlanta, I'm puzzling over how the falling dominoes in the current crisis on Wall Street will impact the trucking and insurance industries.

High fuel prices, hurricanes, dependence on foreign oil, the subprime mortgage mess, the economic rise of China and India, the cost of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and deferred spending on American infrastructure combine to affect both trucking and insurance.

Oil prices have risen due in large part to the increased world demand accompanying the economic development of China and India, while we are dependent upon Arabs, Russians, etc. for our supply. On the other hand, oil prices are moderated by any economic slowdown that decreases demand.

Hurricanes, which may be increasing in intensity due to global warming, temporarily impact fuel prices as they hamper production, refinery and port capacity on the Gulf coast. Payment of hurricane losses impacts the insurance industry that has already been impacted by the financial mess.

In trucking, high fuel costs have both direct and indirect effects. The direct impact of high fuel prices on truckers is obvious. Moreover, I have heard from truckers that motor carriers collect fuel surcharges and too often fail to pass it on to independent owner operators who actually purchase the fuel. The indirect impact is on demand, as shippers shift more long-haul business from trucks to rail. Any slowdown in the economy further depresses demand for shipping.

As more shipping shifts from long-haul trucks to multimodal freight logistics systems involving both long-haul rail and short-haul trucking, we are likely to see more freight containers bolted to poorly maintained trailer chassis. We will see a shift in the technical, regulatory and insurance issues involved in trucking accidents that result. Unfortunately, some judges who have poor understanding of trucking regulations and case law will not comprehend what is going on and render simplistic judgments with devastating impacts on innocent victims. The challenge for lawyers will be to ferret out the details of business relationships in order to overcome the multiple layers of defenses.

Under economic pressure, we can expect many trucking companies to cut corners on all aspects of safety. Those companies that carry more insurance than the law requires will be tempted to bet the company that, despite compromises on safety, they won’t face catastrophic injury claims.

There is already an ongoing shakeout in the trucking industry. That will continue. I keep hearing reports of owner operators just walking away from rigs they can’t pay for any more Some of those used trucks will wind up being exported to other countries. I expect we will see a trend toward reduction of trucking industry capacity and consolidation in the trucking industry.

At the same time, the financial crisis that began with the meltdown in subprime mortgage-backed securities has reached beyond investment banking to the insurance giant AIG. Laying aside any feelings of schadenfreude (joy about another’s misfortune) due to the arrogant corporate culture of AIG under the leadership of former CEO Hank Greenberg, we have to recognize the prominent role of AIG in the insurance industry. As the implications of its downfall ripple through the insurance industry, I expect to share the pain.

While AIG is the teetering giant in the news today, we will soon find that the impact of the financial crisis is widespread in the insurance industry, affecting both the insurance companies that are familiar to the public and the reinsurers that insure the insurance companies. If reinsurers begin to fail, the shock waves will reverberate throughout the insurance industry.

The insurance industry has a long history of blaming injury victims and trial lawyers for its own investment losses. It seems that every financial crisis affecting insurers' investments is soon followed by a new round of premium increases. Unwilling to accept responsibility for investment losses, insurers blame the little guys and campaign for a new round of "tort reform."

Due to the financial meltdown related to securitization of subprime mortgages, we will likely see increasing insurance premiums for everyone, including truckers. Many truckers who are already struggling will be put out of business by increases in fuel and insurance costs unrelated to anything they did wrong.

As the truckers cut costs, safety management will be one of the first things cut. The end result will be that more people will be killed or injured. Lawyers like me will represent the victims. Insurance and trucking companies will fight even harder to avoid paying claims. Stubborn refusals to pay legitimate claims will result in more trials of cases they should settle, and more large jury verdicts.

In this environment more than ever, families that are devastated when trucking companies operate in an unsafe manner need to understand that the insurance companies send "rapid response" teams to scenes of serious accidents, and will try to lull them into complacency while crucial evidence is "lost" or destroyed. Time is of the essence as it is essential to take early action to preserve evidence. We are prepared to fight the good fight against trucking and companies that are determined to avoid and delay payment of legitimate claims.

Continue reading " Impact of the Wall Street crisis on trucking and insurance " »