Maryland Trucking Accident Lawyer Blog

Truck Driver’s Employer Found Liable for Failing to Arrange Safe Crossing at Narrow Bridge

March 10, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, a Missouri appellate court issued a written opinion in the case of Brown v. Davis, holding that a truck driver’s employer could properly be held liable for his role in a fatal accident occurring on a narrow bridge. The court determined that the employer did owe the victim a legal duty to ensure a safe crossing across the narrow bridge where the accident occurred, and that the employer breached that duty when he failed to arrange for a safe crossing.

The Facts of the Case

The defendant was the employer of a truck driver who was towing a logging machine on a flatbed trailer. Since the loaded trailer was wider than a single lane, it protruded into the oncoming lane in areas where the road was narrow. One such location where the load protruded into the opposite lane was a narrow bridge.

Before the truck driver crossed the bridge, the driver’s employer crossed and made sure that it was clear. However, the employer told the driver that the bridge was “all clear” when it was not. A car came over the bridge, and the truck driver knew that there was not likely room for both, so he moved over as much as he could. As he moved over, the logging machine struck the side of the bridge, came loose, and collided with the other vehicle, killing the driver.

Logging Truck Driver Loses Control and Flips Rig, Killing One

March 3, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

With their excessive length, heavy cargo, and long stopping distances, logging trucks are some of the most difficult to control, even compared to other large semi-trucks and tractor-trailers. Increasing the danger, logging trucks often drive on small rural roads on their way to pick up and drop off their cargo. It is for this reason that logging truck drivers need to be properly trained and vetted by their employers.

Most people are familiar with the fact that a negligent driver can be held liable for any injuries that are caused by their dangerous driving. What is less known, however, is that a commercial driver’s employer may also be held liable if it can be shown that the driver did not possess the adequate training, experience, or support to safely operate their vehicle. In some cases, trucking companies will even encourage their employees to “bend” the rules and stay out on the road longer than is legally permissible.

In fact, whether or not it is explicitly stated, almost all truck drivers are financially incentivized to drive longer and rest less. This is because most drivers are paid per mile, rather than per hour. Thus, the more miles covered in a day, the higher the driver’s take-home pay.

Virginia Truck Accident Caused by Sleeping Driver Dozing Off Behind the Wheel

February 24, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

All motorists have a duty to safely operate their vehicles when on public roads. Of course, this includes following all posted traffic signs as well as following the written traffic laws of whatever jurisdiction they happen to be driving in. Not only does this general duty apply to truck drivers, but also a heightened duty applies in many situations.

One of the situations in which truck drivers are held to higher expectations is when it comes to drowsy driving. Truck drivers are required by state and federal laws to document the amount of time they spend on the road, as well as the amount of time they spend resting. This is in order to keep tabs on truck drivers’ total number of hours on the road, in the hope of reducing serious or fatal truck accidents caused by drowsy driving.

Truck drivers are incentivized by their employers to get from Point A to Point B as quickly as possible. Many truck drivers are paid per mile, and the quicker they get to their destination, the quicker they can turn around, load up, and make another profitable trip. However, being on the road for countless hours on end is naturally taxing on a driver, and a driver’s awareness, judgment, and ability to stay awake and safely operate their vehicle is greatly compromised after a while.

State Supreme Court Holds “School Activity Bus” Is Not Considered a “School Bus” for Purposes of Governmental Immunity

February 17, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

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.

Snow Plow Accident Kills One Man

February 10, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Low visibility and big trucks don’t mix. With their heavy weight, increased stopping distance, and unwieldy controls, drivers need to be exceptionally attentive when driving in wintry conditions. This is especially the case for snow plow drivers, who, more than other truck drivers, travel on smaller roads through neighborhoods and near schools. In fact, most of us have seen the damage that a snow plow can do, often to a parked car or an unlucky resident’s mailbox.

However, not all snow plow accidents involve stationary objects. Sometimes snow plow drivers don’t see occupied vehicles or even pedestrians while on their route. In these cases, the victims of a snow plow driver’s negligence may suffer a serious injury or worse.

Of course, pedestrians and other motorists should also be safe by keeping an eye out for snow plows and maintaining a safe distance. However, there is only so much that a motorist on their way to work or a child on their way to school can do. In cases in which a snow plow driver fails to take reasonable precautions and causes a serious or fatal accident, that driver as well as the company or municipality that employs them may be held liable for any injuries suffered as a result.

Court Upholds Verdict Against Trucking Company in Fatal Amtrak Accident

February 3, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, a Nevada court denied a motion filed by a trucking company for a new trial after the court determined that the company’s driver was responsible for a 2011 accident that killed six people, including the driver of the truck. According to one local news source, the court ordered the trucking company to pay roughly $4.5 million in damages.

The Truck Driver Slams into a Moving Amtrak Train

The fatal accident occurred back in 2011, in Nevada’s high desert, near the intersection of Interstate 80 and U.S. Highway 95. Evidently, the truck driver was driving an empty truck when he approached a railroad crossing. Evidence showed that the crossing was marked and that the engineer on the train was engaging the train’s whistle prior to reaching the crossing. However, the truck driver failed to slow down in time and ended up crashing into the second car of the train. The impact between the semi-truck and the train killed the truck driver, the train’s engineer, and four passengers aboard the train.

It also came out in evidence that the truck driver began to apply the brakes about 300 feet prior to the crossing, but he was still unable to stop in time. The National Transportation Safety Bureau conducted an investigation into the fatal accident and determined that the cause was an inattentive truck driver with a history of speeding violations, as well as the fact that the truck he was driving had faulty brakes.

Fatal Hit-and-Run Accidents involving Large Trucks

January 27, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Every driver on the road owes a duty of care to the other motorists with whom he or she shares the road. This duty encompasses a wide range of conduct. Some conduct is required under certain circumstances, and other conduct is prohibited. It is up to the motorist to know what to do and act appropriately in the circumstances. One of the duties all drivers have to others on the road is to stop and render assistance to anyone involved in a vehicle accident, regardless of who is at fault and whether it looked as though anyone was injured.

Truck drivers, with their large, cumbersome vehicles, are no exception to this rule. In fact, many duties and “rules of the road” are more strictly enforced against truck drivers, since they are commercial drivers. When a truck driver causes an accident, or is even involved in an accident that was not his or her fault, that driver must stop to exchange information with the other parties involved, as well as to determine if they need any medical assistance. If they do, the truck’s driver is legally responsible to help them obtain that assistance. This may mean just exchanging information if the accident is minor or calling 9-1-1 and waiting for an ambulance to arrive in more serious accidents.

A driver’s failure to live up to this duty may result in that driver being held liable for an accident victim’s injuries.

Tracy Morgan’s Tragic Accident Brings Truck Driver Fatigue to Center Stage

January 20, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Truck drivers have always been under constant pressure to get to their destinations as quickly as possible. And the fact that some truck drivers push their physical limits to make better time and increase their profits is nothing new. However, after actor and comedian Tracy Morgan was seriously injured in a truck accident in New Jersey last year, truck driver fatigue has finally gotten the attention it deserves.

Resting Requirements for Truck Drivers

Truck drivers all must abide by certain state and federal regulations when it comes to how much time they spend resting and how much time they spend out on the road. The nuances of the rules are confusing, but suffice it to say that drivers need to take short breaks every few hours to rest their eyes, as well as longer breaks every few days to “reset” their system between long hauls.

To enforce these requirements, state and federal governments require that truck drivers maintain logs of their driving and rest times. These “rest logs,” however, have historically been the focus of some controversy because they can easily be changed or forged.

Truck Drivers Will Be Required to Use Electronic Recording for Drive and Rest Times

January 13, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Truck driver fatigue is one of the major causes of truck accidents across the country. In fact, about 18% of all truck accidents list driver fatigue as at least one factor in the accident. The result is that truck driver fatigue results in hundreds of accidents each year, as well as dozens of fatalities.

The U.S. government takes truck driver fatigue very seriously and recently re-examined the regulations regarding the necessary amount of rest drivers must get. One requirement is that drivers take at least a 30-minute break within the first eight hours of driving. Another is that drivers take longer breaks between long trips, ensuring that they get substantial periods of actual rest. In the past, drivers have been able to keep their own paper logs, documenting the time they spend on the road versus the time spent resting.

However, this system lends itself to abuse. Over-worked truck drivers are often pressured by their employers to get from one destination to another as quickly as possible. This encourages truck drivers to get as little rest as they can. In some cases, truck drivers have fraudulently filled out their rest logs or kept two sets of rest logs in order to get around the requirement and to make their employer happy.

Court Determines Summary Judgment Not Appropriate in Railroad Crossing Accident

January 6, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier last month, a state supreme court heard a case involving the tragic death of a young man who was killed by a train when he attempted to cross a pair of railroad tracks. In the case, Gonzalez v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, the plaintiff was the mother of the young man who was killed. She filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the railroad, alleging that the company’s negligence was the cause of her son’s death.

The Facts of the Case

At around one in the afternoon, the plaintiff’s 13-year-old son, Efrain, approached a set of railroad tracks that crossed the road. There was an eastbound track and a westbound track. According to the court’s written opinion, Efrain waited for the eastbound train to pass and then began to cross the tracks. However, the westbound train quickly approached and struck Efrain, killing him instantly.

Efrain’s mother filed suit against the railroad, arguing that the company was negligent in having the two trains cross the road on separate tracks so close together in time. She argued that since the extremely loud noise of the first train passing drowned out the noise from another approaching train, her son would not have been able to know that a second train was approaching.