Articles Posted in School Bus Accidents

While every precaution can be taken to avoid a Maryland school bus accident, some accidents may be unforeseeable. In fact, earlier this year two people were killed and dozens other injured when a school bus attempted to make a legal U-turn across three lanes of traffic. According to a local news report, the bus was traveling in a caravan with two other busses when the drivers missed an exit. Afterwards, all three drivers determined their own route to get to the final destination.

One of the busses attempted to make a U-turn on the highway. However, a dump truck rear-ended the school bus as it tried to cross three lanes of perpendicular traffic to complete its turn. The impact of the collision tore the bus off of its frame.

In the wake of this fatal accident, lawmakers have begun a push to install three-point seatbelts – similar to those found in cars – in all district school busses. Lawmakers believe that by installing seatbelts in school busses, the chance of an accident resulting in serious injury or death will be greatly decreased. Indeed, in the days following this specific accident the National Transportation Safety Board announced its recommendation that all school busses should be equipped with some type of seatbelt for students.

Continue Reading

School bus drivers are entrusted with carrying society’s most precious cargo – its children. Because of this, school bus drivers are held to a high standard. Indeed, whenever a Maryland school bus accident occurs, the driver is usually suspended, and the accident is investigated.

After a Maryland school bus accident, the families of the students involved may be left wondering how the accident occurred and whom they can hold accountable for their child’s injuries. Of course, the obvious answer is the school bus driver or, if the accident was another driver’s fault, the at-fault driver. However, there may be additional parties that can be named in a Maryland school bus accident case, such as the school district and any of the officials responsible for hiring the driver.

Under the doctrine of vicarious liability, employers can be held responsible for the actions of their employees. These include school bus drivers, whose employers are usually the school district for which they drive. In some cases, the school district contracts with an outside company who provides the drivers. In any event, when a school bus driver is acting within the scope of his employment and causes an accident, the driver’s employer – whether public or private – may also be held accountable. Of course, establishing vicarious liability requires that proof be submitted establishing that the driver was properly hired and employed at the time of the accident, as well as the fact that he was acting as an employee at the time of the accident.

Continue Reading

Large trucks have the capacity to cause major damage when they are involved in an accident. These dangers are increased when a truck being driven is on a crowded highway. In general, it is a motorist’s duty to ensure that they are operating their vehicle in a safe manner and in compliance with state and local regulations.

Due to the size and weight of large vehicles, this often means that truck drivers must leave additional room between their rig and other vehicles on the road. Indeed, a large truck traveling at highway speeds can take the length of a football field to come to a complete stop. When a truck driver fails to take the necessary precautions when operating his vehicle, he may be liable for any injuries that result.

Notwithstanding a truck driver’s negligence, sometimes other motorists contribute to truck accidents. This may be a distracted motorist who swerves out of her lane or an aggressive driver who cuts off a truck that ultimately crashes into another vehicle. In these situations, it may be the case that both the truck driver and another party are liable. In such situations, it will be up to a jury to decide which parties are liable and the percentage of fault for each driver.

Continue Reading

Earlier this month, an appellate court in California issued a written opinion in a case brought by a woman injured in a bus accident against the bus line. In the case, Gee v. Greyhound Lines, the court determined that a procedural mistake made by the plaintiff’s attorney was excusable and that the trial judge did not err when he allowed the plaintiff to remedy the mistake and proceed with the lawsuit.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff was a passenger who was injured on a Greyhound bus after the bus was involved in a crash. According to the court’s opinion, the bus struck two cars and then crashed into a tree. The plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against the bus line, claiming that the bus driver was “driving at an excessive rate of speed” immediately prior to the collision.

Initially, the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in Sacramento County. However, the defendant successfully petitioned the court to transfer the case to Fresno County. As a result of the transfer, the plaintiff’s attorney was responsible to pay an additional filing fee.

Continue Reading

Earlier this month, a tragic school bus accident in Chattanooga, Tennessee claimed the lives of six children and injured many others. According to a local news report covering the tragic accident, the driver of the bus has been arrested on vehicular homicide charges.

The accident occurred after school on the students’ ride home. Evidently, the bus driver was operating the vehicle at a high rate of speed on a road that was not a part of the driver’s route when he lost control of the bus and struck a tree. The force from the collision was so great that it bent the bus in half upon impact.

The Bus Driver Had a Checkered Driving History

According to the most recent news report covering the accident, the school bus driver had been the subject of several student and parent complaints in the past. In fact, there were reports that the driver had been driving too fast, had become agitated and aggressive with students, and had even intentionally come to a quick stop to make the students fall out of their seats. The driver had also been involved in another school bus accident just two months before.

Continue Reading

Earlier this month, an interestingly nuanced decision was released in the case of Irving v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education. In the case, a state supreme court determined that a “school activity bus” transporting students to a sporting event was not to be considered a “school bus” for the purposes of the state’s Tort Claims Act. Thus, a plaintiff who was injured in an accident involving a school activity bus will not be permitted to recover compensation for her injuries, based on the state’s sovereign immunity.

Irving v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education:  The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff was injured when her vehicle was struck by a bus carrying students to a football game. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the driver of the bus, who was an employee of the Board of Education. In response to the lawsuit, the Board of Education asked the court to dismiss the case, based on its sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity is an old legal doctrine that is still in effect today. Simply said, the doctrine states that governments cannot be held liable for personal injury accidents unless they consent to being named in the lawsuit.

Continue Reading