At the beginning of trial, the defense offered our clients $750,000 to settle their wrongful death claim. On the eve of closing arguments, we settled for 10x the amount.
As we covered in our last blog, some of the most complex injury cases we have litigated here at Walton Telken are those involving tractor-trailers. For a myriad of reasons, tractor-trailer accident cases are significantly more challenging to litigate than typical car accident cases, including:
- Tractor-trailer accident cases typically cause more extensive damages, as they involve wrongful deaths or catastrophic personal injuries.
- Tractor-trailer accident cases often involve multiple potentially liable parties and thus require highly complex evidence gathering and analysis to determine (and prove) fault.
- Strict federal regulations governing tractor-trailer operators demand experienced attorneys familiar with the specifics of the numerous applicable laws.
- Tractor-trailer accident cases require litigating against well-resourced corporations and insurance companies with aggressive legal teams.
Each of these challenges—and our firm’s ability to meet them—were illuminated in a case brought by Walton Telken on behalf of the family of a woman killed in a multi-vehicle crash on a Missouri interstate during the winter of 2019. The case’s successful litigation involved years of meticulous evidence-gathering and expert analysis, all culminating in a two-week trial. At the outset of trial, the defendants offered our clients $750,000 to settle all claims against them. On the eve of closing arguments, the parties reached a $7.5 million settlement—10x the defendants’ pre-trial offer.
Though no amount of compensation can possibly make up for the devastation of losing a loved one, our team is incredibly proud of the result we were able to achieve on behalf of the decedent and her family—especially because many attorneys would rush to settle this type of case. That is the difference between attorneys who handle tractor-trailer litigation and those who treat them like typical motor vehicle accidents.
In this installment of Walton Telken Courtside Chronicles, we dive into the facts and evolution of this highly-complex truck accident case.
The Facts
The decedent—the beloved wife and mother of our clients—was operating a passenger vehicle on her way to work on a highway in Missouri when the operator of a tractor-trailer swerved into her lane and struck her vehicle twice. These impacts caused the decedent’s vehicle to become entangled with the trailer and dragged down the highway, before her vehicle detached and came briefly to rest. This initial collision between the decedent’s vehicle and the tractor-trailer resulted in immediate congestion on the highway, as the other vehicles slowed, swerved or stopped to avoid colliding with the decedent’s vehicle and/or the tractor-trailer.
Moments later, an individual operating a Ford F450 came upon the wreck and failed to slow his vehicle. The Ford F450 collided with multiple vehicles that were stopped on the highway before barreling into the decedent’s vehicle.
As a direct result of these collisions, our clients’ loved one sustained fatal injuries.
The Challenge
Typically, a motor vehicle or trucking accident case progresses from an initial notification of the incident to the insurance company, to investigations, pre-suit negotiations, and, in some cases, a lawsuit and settlement or final court judgement. The complexity of an accident claim generally increases with the severity of injuries and when liability is disputed—both of which were factors in this particular case.
You may be thinking: A tractor-trailer side swipes a woman driving a passenger vehicle on her way to work, resulting in a Ford 450 striking her. The woman dies as a result. Seems pretty straightforward, right?
Not exactly.
Determining fault in this case involved highly complex accident investigation and expert analysis. Over the course of several years, the experienced trucking accident attorneys at Walton Telken meticulously pieced together the sequence of events and connected the crash’s causes to its effects. Doing so involved a careful review of all available digital and physical evidence—much of which is unique to tractor-trailer collisions—and interviewing and deposing multiple key witnesses, including accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering experts, and more.
Further underscoring the complexity of multi-vehicle and/or tractor-trailer accidents (and the importance of retaining attorneys equipped to navigate them), the story that emerged from this extensive investigation was far different than what a rudimentary assessment by less-experienced attorneys may have produced.
Determining and proving liability in this case proved challenging for a number of reasons:
- The initial sideswipe collision between the tractor-trailer and the passenger vehicle was relatively low-impact. The employer of the tractor-trailer operator conceded that their employee indeed sideswiped the decedent, but it was determined that the initial collision was, in fact, relatively low impact. Accordingly, the corporation that employed the tractor-trailer operator argued that only the collision with the Ford 450 caused the decedent’s death. The challenge, therefore, became proving that our client would not have died but for the operator of the tractor-trailer side swiping her. It was this initial sideswipe, we successfully argued, that not only started the entire sequence of events, but ultimately directly caused her death.
- Our client had a severe pre-existing heart condition. Between the moment when the tractor-trailer sideswiped the decedent’s vehicle and her collision with the Ford 450, a short (and disputed) amount of time had elapsed. Eyewitnesses testified that during this time, they did not observe her move. It was later discovered (and established through expert medical testimony) that our client suffered a severe cardiac event—one which may not have occurred but for the decedent’s pre-existing heart condition—but which we successfully argued resulted from the initial side swipe.
If the tractor-trailer driver had not sideswiped the decedent, we argued, she would still be alive. We then turned our focus to the precipitating events of the sideswipe—which were foreseeable given the tractor-trailer operator’s poor track record and his employer’s poor oversight.
The Evolution of Claims
This is where our significant experience investigating and litigating tractor-trailer accidents proved critical to this case. Applying our meticulous analysis of the facts, the case evolved from a “typical” wrongful death claim against the operator of the tractor-trailer and the operator of the Ford F450 (as described above) into a more complex case involving negligent hiring and training claims against the employer of the tractor-trailer operator.
In an ordinary wrongful death claim against a tractor-trailer operator, an employer (in this case, the trucking company) is liable for the negligent conduct of its employee (in this case, the tractor-trailer operator), and is responsible for the resulting harm to others, through a legal doctrine known as respondeat superior. But an employer may also be independently liable for separate and additional claims of negligent hiring and/or training. A negligent hiring claim arises when it hires an employee-driver and permits him or her to operate its vehicles despite it knowing—or having reason to know—that the driver was incompetent or had a history of dangerous driving. Similarly, a negligent training claim arises when a trucking company fails to provide adequate training to a driver it knows, or should know, is incompetent, inexperienced, or has a history of dangerous driving.
Both types of independent claims were brought against the trucking company in this case. Proving our negligent hiring and training claims required a careful examination of the trucking company’s employee handbook, including its policies and procedures on hiring, qualifying, training, and/or evaluating drivers as well as a thorough and exhaustive investigation into the tractor-trailer operator’s past employment and personal and professional driving history .
We discovered that the tractor-trailer operator had minimal tractor-trailer driving experience. We also discovered that he had been convicted for excessive speeding just several months prior to the crash. And just a month prior to that, he was cited for a failure to yield to a right of way. That meant he had been assessed a total of five license violation points in a 30-day period, just five months prior to being hired as a commercial driver by the trucking company and nine months prior to the crash that killed our client. Further, the employer failed to conduct any road test evaluation of the operator of the tractor-trailer or to even get a copy of his driving record prior to hiring him or allowing him to drive a tractor-trailer. That meant the trucking company had directly violated their own standards for hiring and training the tractor-trailer operator as well as certain mandatory federal safety regulations.
Because of these discoveries, we were able to submit a claim for punitive damages at trial. This is because under Missouri law, evidence of a trucking company’s failure to follow the proper federal motor carrier safety regulations and industry standards supports an award of punitive damages. Further, evidence that a trucking company violated its own standards can also demonstrate a conscious disregard for safety for the purpose of establishing punitive damages.
The Outcome
We argued that: (1) the trucking company was vicariously liable for the negligent conduct of its driver; and (2) the trucking company was independently liable for its hiring and training of the tractor-trailer operator. We thus asked the jury to find the trucking company liable for compensatory and punitive damages to both compensate our clients for the unimaginable loss that they had sustained and to punish the trucking company for its complete disregard of safety.
It is worth noting that this initially seemingly clear-cut “crash” case is one many lawyers who are well-versed in typical motor vehicle accidents but lacking deep experience in trucking law would have rushed to settle. On the first day of trial, two years after making only a $50,000 settlement offer, the defendants offered our clients $750,000 to settle. But confident in our case, our clients and what the evidence would show, we respectfully declined their offer.
Two weeks later, on the eve of closing arguments, we are proud to have reached a $7.5 million settlement on behalf of our clients—ten times the defendants’ final pre-trial offer.
Courtside Series
We’re a team of experienced lawyers and staff on a mission to provide top-tier, skillful legal representation to people injured or killed by wrongdoing. Walton Telken Injury Attorneys represent clients in a wide range of case types, including motor vehicle accidents, truck and tractor trailer accidents, medical malpractice, mesothelioma and asbestos, workers’ compensation, product liability, and more.
At Walton Telken, we are most proud of our reputation as attorneys who will never hesitate to bring a case to trial if it means securing the best possible outcome for our clients. In our Courtside Series, we give you a front row view into the action, sharing recent wins and insights from trial.
For more information about our tractor-trailer accident practice, please visit waltontelken.com
