Call Now
The types of activity giving rise to potential legal liability differs with each type of responsible party. Thus, the assessment of potentially culpable conduct must be made on a case-by-case basis. For example, manufacturer liability depends largely upon product design or manufacture. Service providers, such as maintenance companies and cargo loaders, face liability when their conduct drops below a reasonable standard of care in performing services.
This section will focus on the two most common categories of defendants (truck drivers and motor carriers) and the most commonly asserted violations by the same. There are multiple other potential responsible parties in a commercial motor vehicle case. If you have a claim against another category of entity, please contact us for more information on prosecuting the claim.
Generally, the commercial driver and motor carrier must comply with the requirements of the FMCSR, the applicable state Rules of the Road, and accepted standards of industry practice. Failure to adhere to these standards are the basis for assessing potential liability of a responsible party. The claims that result will be negligence, negligence per se, recklessness, or intentionality, depending on the type of conduct at issue.
Commercial Driver and Carrier Liability
When we assess a commercial motor vehicle case, we begin with a checklist of potentially culpable conduct. We assess each aspect of the commercial vehicle case to determine the potential claims. Here is a checklist that we use:
We assess professional driver acts or omissions, including but not limited to the following:
- Lack of Driver Skill
- Distracted Driving
- Cell Phone Use
- Other Distractions
- Violation of Rules of the Road
- Deviation from Industry Standards
- Drowsy Driving and Hours of Service Rules
- Driver Impairment (Drugs or Alcohol)
- Failure to Maintain or Inspect Equipment
- Stopped Vehicles – Lighting and Warning
- Weather Hazards
We also assess motor carrier acts or omissions, including but not limited to the following:
- Driver Error and Respondeat Superior
- Improper Dispatching
- Negligent Hiring, Entrustment, or Retention
- Improper Cargo Loading
Each of these potentially culpable activities are covered in turn below. This is not an exhaustive list, of course. But, it is instead a list of commonly litigated issues in commercial motor vehicle cases in our experience.
Lack of Driver Skill
Like any other technical skill, it takes time to become proficient at driving a commercial vehicle. A fundamental element of most commercial motor vehicle cases is a claim that the driver failed to exercise the requisite level of skill at the time of the wreck. In order to determine the standard of care required, a competent truck wreck attorney examines the following: (a) the FMCSR as applicable; (b) the State regulations as applicable; (c) industry standards put forth by the corporations involved and well known trainers, such as JJ Keller & Associates; and, (d) expert opinion.
Examples of actions that fall below the standard of care may include swinging too wide or too narrow, running off of the road, failing to maintain lane, improper backing, or simply failing to follow the prescribed requirements of safe vehicle operations. Comparing those actions with the standard of care is a key first step to many truck accident cases.
Distracted Driving
A tractor-trailer may weigh as much as 80,000 pounds or more. As a result, a truck takes 40% longer (than a civilian vehicle) to come to a complete stop when traveling 65mph on standard road conditions. Likewise, a tractor-trailer takes up to 16 seconds to complete a left turn and clear an intersection. Therefore, distracted driving can mean life and death.
Distracted driving is the inability to show the requisite amount of attention to the road because something else is diverting the driver’s attention. The sources of distraction are infinite.
Pro Note: A human factors expert may be used to detail potential distractions while driving. Some of the more commonly litigated distractions potentially affecting a driver, include the following: eating, listening to the radio, daydreaming, and conversation. In addition, in recent years, there has been increasing litigation on cell phone use as a potential distraction for professional drivers. A human factors expert may be engaged to opine that cell phone use was (or was not) a contributing factor to the collision.
The FMCSR specifically prohibit texting and driving. The FMCSR also prohibit using a hand-held mobile device while driving. Likewise, in Georgia, texting while driving or talking on the phone (without a handsfree device) is against the law for civilian motorists and commercial truckers. Let’s look at each of these provisions.
- 49 C.F.R. § 392.80 prohibits texting while driving. As it states clearly, “[n]o driver shall engage in texting while driving.” It also imposes a duty on the motor carrier. “No motor carrier shall allow or require its drivers to engage in texting while driving.”
- 49 C.F.R. § 392.82 also prohibits using a “hand-held mobile telephone” while driving. “No driver shall use a hand-held mobile telephone while driving a CMV.” It also imposes a duty on the motor carrier. “No motor carrier shall allow or require its drivers to use a hand-held mobile telephone while driving a CMV.” Note that while it prohibits using a “hand-held” device, it does not apply to the use of a handsfree device.
The Georgia rules are similar. Georgia law expressly bars texting, in almost any manner, while driving. O.C.G.A. § 40-6-241.2 reads as follows: “No person who is 18 years of age or older or who has a Class C license shall operate a motor vehicle on any public road or highway of this state while using a wireless telecommunications device to write, send, or read any text based communication, including but not limited to a text message, instant message, e-mail, or Internet data.” There are, of course, exceptions for emergency reporting; but, for the most part, it is prohibited.
In addition, Georgia law expressly proscribes the use of a cellular phone, in almost any manner, while driving. O.C.G.A. § 40-6-241 prohibits anyone, including commercial drivers, from “physically hold[ing] or support[ing]” a phone with their body. It also prohibits holding the phone for use in virtually anyway, including (a) navigation or (b) video streaming. Commercial drivers are barred from using “more than a single button” to interact with a phone. Commercial drivers are also prohibited from “reach[ing]” for the phone in a manner that causes the driver to no longer be “in a seated driving position” or buckled.
Pro Note: While some cell phone use is permitted (like, for example, talking on the phone with a handsfree device), other industry standards may impose stricter limitations on commercial drivers. We have handled cases, for example, where the internal policies of the trucking company do not permit any cell phone use while driving.
Negligence Per Se, Violation of “Rules of the Road”
In addition to the provisions of the FMCSR, state law applicable to traffic collisions may form a basis for liability. These “Rules of the Road” may provide additional, more stringent standards for the truck driver and motor carrier involved. The FMCSR do not preclude states from establishing standards for driver conduct within the state. Specifically, 49 C.F.R. § 390.9 states that the FMCSR are “not intended to preclude States or subdivisions thereof from establishing or enforcing State or local laws relating to safety, the compliance with which would not prevent full compliance with these regulations by the person subject thereto.” Because our law firm is based in Georgia, we will utilize the Georgia rules as a state-specific example of how the Rules of the Road can form the basis of a negligence per se claim.
Georgia establishes standards of road operations that commercial drivers and others must follow. All drivers in Georgia, commercial and civilian, are required to adhere to the “Uniform Rules of the Road.” These statutory rules can be found at O.C.G.A. § 40-6-1 through 40-6-397.
Pro Note: Georgia has adopted the FMCSR as the standard for operations of intrastate carriers as well.
The Georgia “Uniform Rules of the Road” govern many areas of safety such as:
- obeying the instructions of a mechanical traffic control device (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-20 through 40-6-26)
- passing or overtaking other vehicles (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-40 through 40-6-46)
- following too closely (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-49)
- making proper right or left hand turns within intersections (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-70 through 40-6-71; 40-6-120 through 40-6-126)
- obeying stop signs and yield signs (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-72)
- obeying posted speed limits and driving at appropriate rates of speed (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-180 through 40-6-188)
- driving while intoxicated (O.C.G.A. § 40-6-391 through 40-6-392)
The Uniform Rules of the Road of any state must be considered carefully when evaluating a truck accident case.
Deviation from Industry Standards
Commercial motor carriers also have industry standards with which they must comply. The motor carrier’s own internal standards and industry-recognized-leaders in motor carrier compliance are two significant sources of information concerning the standard of care. “Training materials for professional truck drivers are relevant to this case as evidence of what an ordinarily prudent person engaged as a professional truck driver would have done when confronted with the same circumstances.”
In addition to internal training materials, there are companies that specialize in training drivers. One of the best known is JJ Keller, a company that specializes in education and training of truck drivers. The materials published by companies like JJ Keller may be reviewed and compared to your commercial motor vehicle collision.
Pro Note: While training materials may inform the standard of care, there is generally no Federal requirement for a motor carrier to train their drivers. “The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations generally do not require trucking companies to train their drivers. For instance, when a driver has a valid CDL, the motor carrier may accept the CDL in lieu of subjecting the driver to a road test.”
We have previously used experts in truck accident regulations with success. Competent experts may opine as to the standard of care for professional drivers, when it is outside the knowledge of the average juror.
Contact Weatherby Law for Help with Commercial Vehicle Lawsuits
If you or someone you know has been injured in a commercial vehicle or truck accident, identifying culpable conduct is just the beginning. Successfully pursuing a claim requires a thorough understanding of the law, careful investigation, and experienced legal representation.
Weatherby Law Firm is committed to helping accident victims and their families seek justice and recover the compensation they deserve.
