Published on:

By

A fatal truck accident on a Los Angeles area freeway highlights a type of safety hazard we also see in Atlanta, Georgia.

In the predawn darkness last Friday, a passenger vehicle struck the rear of a disabled tractor trailer parked in a traffic lane on I-5 at Burbank, California, killing the driver of the car.

Media report are unclear as to how long the truck had been parked there, and as to whether it had hazard lights activated or reflective triangles deployed to warn oncoming traffic, as required by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. However, a comment posted on the KABC-TV web site, purportedly by a relative of the decedent, indicates that the man who was killed was commuting to work, and that there were no hazard flashers or reflective warning devices utilized on the tractor trailer.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, at 49 CFR §392.22 requires:

(a) Hazard warning signal flashers. Whenever a commercial motor vehicle is stopped upon the traveled portion of a highway or the shoulder of a highway for any cause other than necessary traffic stops, the driver of the stopped commercial motor vehicle shall immediately activate the vehicular hazard warning signal flashers and continue the flashing until the driver places the warning devices required by paragraph (b) of this section. The flashing signals shall be used during the time the warning devices are picked up for storage before movement of the commercial motor vehicle. The flashing lights may be used at other times while a commercial motor vehicle is stopped in addition to, but not in lieu of, the warning devices required by paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) Placement of warning devices-

(b)(1) General rule. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, whenever a commercial motor vehicle is stopped upon the traveled portion or the shoulder of a highway for any cause other than necessary traffic stops, the driver shall, as soon as possible, but in any event within 10 minutes, place the warning devices required by §393.95 of this subchapter, in the following manner:

(b)(1)(i) One on the traffic side of and 4 paces (approximately 3 meters or 10 feet) from the stopped commercial motor vehicle in the direction of approaching traffic;

(b)(1)(ii) One at 40 paces (approximately 30 meters or 100 feet) from the stopped commercial motor vehicle in the center of the traffic lane or shoulder occupied by the commercial motor vehicle and in the direction of approaching traffic; and
(b)(1)(iii) One at 40 paces (approximately 30 meters or 100 feet) from the stopped commercial motor vehicle in the center of the traffic lane or shoulder occupied by the commercial motor vehicle and in the direction away from approaching traffic.

The investigation apparently continues.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

When a tractor trailer from Alabama crossed the median on I-65 in Kentucky last week and struck a passenger van head-on, it killed 10 devout Mennonites en route to a wedding. The truck driver also died in the crash.

The National Transportation Safety Board is still investigating why the tractor trailer crossed the median and collided with the van. However, one thing that has to come to light is that the trucking company had an unsatisfactory safety rating with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Hester, Inc., of Fayette, Alabama, had a Safestat rating of 88.4 based on failed safety inspections. Any Safestat score above 75 is considered unsatisfactory. An official of the American Trucking Association stated to the Washington Post that Hester should not have been operating, based on that Safestat score.

There is no report yet as to specific violations of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations related to this crash. But in my experience companies with Safestat ratings that bad have a terrible safety culture and we find multiple violations of safety rules when a crash occurs.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Truckers have a tough, dangerous job. While my trucking accident law practice in Atlanta, Georgia, is often focused on representing folks in smaller vehicles who are on the receiving end of highly unfavorable physics in collisions, I also represent some truckers.

Two news stories this week highlight one of the dangerous realities of trucking. The cabs of road tractors are not built with driver safety as a primary consideration.

A 26 year old truck driver in New Jersey was killed at Whitehall, NY, when his tractor trailer skidded, jack-knifed and rolled over. Virtually the same thing happened in another fatal truck rollover on the Maine Turnpike.

While many passenger cars today have strong internal frames equivalent to a roll cage, the roofs of most road tractors have little or no occupant protection design. There are at least a couple of possible factors in that, including the lack of occupant safety rules governing manufacturers and the desire of trucking companies to avoid any additional weight that is not directly related to moving freight. When a huge road tractor has a roof with the structural integrity of a soft drink can rolls over, the driver doesn’t have much of a chance.

I won’t speculate on how much of a factor it may be that many road tractors are chosen by employers for drivers on whose lives they purchase “dead peasant” life insurance, rather than by parents as vehicles in which to transport their children. There may not be a causal relationship there at all.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In the Georgia legislature, two proposed bills would crack down on texting while driving. Both have been sent to a study committee.

HB 938 would prohibit the use of wireless telecommunications devices for sending or reading text messages while operating a motor vehicle. A conviction would be punishable by a fine of not less than $50.00 nor more than $100.00. In addition, two points would be assessed to violators of this provision. The bill provides exceptions for engaging in a wireless communication using a wireless telecommunications device in emergency situations.

This bill would amend Code Section 40-5-57.4 by requiring the driver’s license of any operator of a motor vehicle, who is determined to be at fault for causing an automobile accident while texting, be suspended. A first suspension shall be for a period of 90 days. A second or subsequent suspension shall be for a period of six months. The suspension will terminate after the suspension period and when the person pays a restoration fee of $60.00 or, $50.00 when processed by mail.

HB 944 would prohibit a person from writing, sending, or reading a text-based communication on a wireless telecommunications device while operating a motor vehicle. It provides for exceptions in emergency situations. Any conviction for a violation would be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $300.00.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Today the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration banned text messaging by interstate truck drivers during operation of a commercial motor vehicle.

Virginia Tech’s Transportation Institute released a study last July that found that when truckers text, they are 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash or near miss.

Both houses of Congress are considering bills to restrict texting. Nineteen states have banned the practice. The new federal regulation provides that drivers of commercial vehicles caught texting may be fined up to $2,750.

Texting and cellphone use have been banned in many major commercial fleets, including FedEx’s 43,000 vehicles and the 100,000 used by United Parcel Service.

This will be more material for my presentation to the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group at Vancouver, British Columbia, in July.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

As a trucking safety trial attorney in Georgia, I spend a lot of time with truck drivers, either representing them when they get badly hurt, suing them when they badly hurt someone else, or interviewing them as witnesses. Based on personal experience, I’ve thought about posting a review of truck stop food. I know that usually when they break the safety rules, it is because the company pressured them to do so.

This morning I received a comment on this blog from a truck driver who tells it like it is. Rather than leaving it buried in “comments,” I’m posting it on its own. For obvious reasons, I must protect this truck driver’s identity.

Where I work essentially…if you don’t make the logs appear legal and continue running past your 70 hour limit and are caught by the DOT,shut down for 10 hrs and written up for a ‘Violation'(as opposed to falsifying your logs to ‘look legal’ and keep rolling) you will be suspended for 2 weeks by the ‘safety dept’ and your truck will most likely be given to a new driver while your suspended,on the other hand,if you are late delivering,you will be written up and possibly terminated. How many hours you have to operate is irrelevant. Freight comes first. Technically isn’t “coercion” like this against the law ?


That has the ring of truth as the voice from an honest truck driver.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Since I represent victims of catastrophic trucking accidents in Georgia, I tend to deal with some pretty bad stuff. A friend from high school days who occasionally glances at this blog asked me a few days ago, “are there ever any positive outcomes for any of the cases you represent?” My response was that people don’t call me because nothing bad happened.

But recently I met members of a Georgia family who are incredibly blessed to be alive. A tractor trailer crossed the median of an interstate highway and struck them head-on. Another truck struck them from behind, knocking them back into the first truck. Miraculously, none of them were catastrophically injured. Of course they had some injuries, but it is amazing that anyone came out alive.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

As a Georgia trucking accident attorney, I expect accidents involving truck drivers who are extremely fatigued, cheating on their driving hours, distracted, or impaired by medications or by amphetamines used to stay awake. I expect mechanical and maintenance issues. I just don’t expect interstate truck drivers to be drunk behind the wheel. I know and respect a lot of truckers, and expect better than that.

But there are exceptions. On New Year’s Eve, a trucker from Texas was charged with DUI and vehicular homicide after he struck a Michigan couple’s car and killed the wife, as he got off the I-75 exit at Sam Nunn Parkway in Perry, Georgia.

Janice Hanes, 65, of Fenwick, Michigan, was declared dead at the hospital in Perry. Murray Hanes, 66, her husband, was transported by ambulance to The Medical Center of Georgia in Macon with head injuries.

Luis Lopez Guzman Jr., 50, of San Antonio, also was charged with DUI and leaving the scene of an accident. He was driving a 2000 Kenworth tractor-trailer when he struck the Hanes’ pickup truck. According a news report by Becky Purser on Macon.com, he fled the scene and was apprehended on I-75 headed south toward Florida. The news reports do not identify the company for which he was driving.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations are quite strict about use of alcohol by truck drivers. 49 C.F.R. § 392.5 bans use or possession of alcohol in operation of a commercial motor vehicle. “No driver shall . . . [u]se alcohol, . . . or be under the influence of alcohol, within 4 hours before going on duty or operating, or having physical control of, a commercial motor vehicle; or . . . [u]se alcohol, be under the influence of alcohol, or have any measured alcohol concentration or detected presence of alcohol, while on duty, or operating, or in physical control of a commercial motor vehicle.” Any driver is violation of this is placed in “out of service status” for 24 hours. “No motor carrier shall require or permit a driver to . . . [v]iolate any provision [of this section or] [b]e on duty or operate a commercial motor vehicle if, by the driver’s general appearance or conduct or by other substantiating evidence, the driver appears to have used alcohol within the preceding 4 hours.”

Intoxication of a truck driver is grounds for punitive damages in a personal injury case and in a survival action by the estate of a decedent in Georgia. While a wrongful death claim in Georgia does not include punitive damages, the measure of damage is the full value of the life of the decedent, including both economic and intangible aspects of life.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

I first learned of a fatal log truck accident in the Savannah area last week when a Savannah newspaper reporter phoned me for background information on log truck regulations in Georgia.

Police investigators in Garden City, Georgia, found 24 safety violations on a log truck that lost its load of logs, which crushed and killed a pedestrian.

The log truck was driven by Daniel Morris of Uvalda, Ga. He reportedly swerved as he neared an intersection, dislodging the trailer of logs. Neal James Hamilton, 57, of Lansing, Mich., was crushed by the falling load of logs.

Violations on the log truck included faulty brakes, balding tires, improper lights, failure to secure the load of logs properly, and a defective fifth wheel that attached the trailer to the truck.

Log trucks in Georgia are regulated by the Georgia Forest Products Trucking Rules. Those rules are relatively lax when compared with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, but it sound like even those weak rules were ignored in this case.

The victim was from Lansing, the capital of Michigan, where I recently took the deposition of an expert witness at Michigan State University.
Continue reading →

Contact Information
1629 Monroe Dr NE
Atlanta, GA 30324
Phone: (404) 253-7862
Fax: (404) 524-1769
Email: ken.shigley@johnsonward.com
This website is in no way intended to constitute and does not constitute legal advice. There is no attorney/client relationship created by reading or viewing this website. Sending email does not create an attorney/client relationship with any lawyer or law firm on this website.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Kenneth L. Shigley, LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design