NEW HOURS OF SERVICE REGULATIONS
I thought the new Hours of Service (HOS) Regulations made sense, and that there wouldn't be much controversy about the new regulations. After all, the new regulation just put back into place the old rule. The old rule required drivers of 80,000 pound tractor trailers to stop after driving 10 hours. The law was changed under President Bush to allow truckers to drive 11 hours, an extra hour over the prior regulations. So the proposed regulations just put things back the way they were. No harm, no foul, the government gets a do over because they messed up when they extended the HOS to 11 hours. Not a controversial move I thought when I first read it. WOW was I wrong! The trucking companies hate this proposal.
But why? Studies, such as the Penn State study (“On the Relationship of Crash Risk and Driver Hours of Service”) presented by Dr. Paul Jovanisat the 2005 International Truck & Bus Safety Security Symposium in Alexandria, Va. have shown that " the crash risk is statistically similar for the first six hours of driving and then increases in significant steps thereafter. The 11th hour has a crash risk more than three times the first hour." The 11th hour of driving is therefore 300 percent more dangerous than the first hour of driving. Of course the longer a truck is in motion the more money the trucking company makes. Should those profits really come at our, the public's, expense?
Don Schneider was able to make the Forbes 400 list as a Billionaire as the owner of Schneider trucking. Perhaps an industry that creates BILLIONAIRES can think about public safety... at least this once? Most drivers would also appreciate being limited to 10 hours of driving. They know that 11 hours is to long to be on the road. There is a reason they call trucks rolling sweatshops.
Here is hoping that the industry outcry doesn't overcome common sense on this. The 10 hour rule is far safer and simply puts the industry back where they were before the Bush expansion. It should be the law.
Morgan Adams Quoted In Chattanooga Times Free Press on Trucking Safety
Bill ignites war of words over trucking safety
by Ellis Smith
Ringgold, Ga., widow Cindy Whitaker lost her husband, brother and niece in 2009 when a bucket truck hit their vehicle head-on.
Now she’s pushing for tighter federal regulations for truckers, even as the trucking industry points to federal statistics indicating that America’s roads are safer than ever.
Whitaker, in conjunction with the Truck Safety Coalition, threw her support Tuesday behind the newly reintroduced Safe Highways and Infrastructure Protection Act during a press conference in Washington, D.C.
The bill would freeze current federal truck size and weight limits, disallow the operation of overweight trucks and establish an enforcement program, the organization said.
The coalition released poll results that said 74 percent of Americans oppose heavier trucks and 79 percent favor lowering the maximum number of hours truckers may drive daily.
But a spokesman for the American Trucking Associations slammed the Truck Safety Coalition’s poll results, calling them slanted and misleading.
The questions begin with a sentence or statistic from a safety advocate point of view before getting to the questions, according to the methodology posted on trucksafety.org.
“This is a push poll of the worst kind, and proves that while figures don’t lie, liars can figure,” said ATA spokesman Sean McNally.
Bill Graves, president of the American Trucking Associations, accused the bill’s backers of co-opting the grief of Americans who have lost family members in accidents “to advance an agenda designed to hurt our economy and our industry, and benefit trucking’s competitors and well-heeled union interests.”
Trucking has improved its fatality and injury crash rate by 30 percent since the current rules were implemented in 2004, Graves said.
The rate of trucking accident fatalities fell to 1.17 per 100 million miles in 2009, the safest year since the government began tracking the statistics in 1975, according to data from the Federal Highway Administration and National Highway Safety Administration.
However, the Truck Safety Coalition released statistics showing that 4,000 people are still killed each year and 100,000 more are injured in truck crashes, according to Joan Claybrook, chairwoman of the Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways.
“Families and truck drivers are being slaughtered on our highways because of the trucking industry’s relentless push for bigger, overweight trucks operated by drivers who are exhausted and pressured to meet unreasonable delivery deadlines,” Claybrook said.
Morgan Adams, a Chattanooga-based lawyer who specializes in truck accident cases, called for restructuring driver pay to an hourly rate instead of by the mile as an incentive toward safety.
“Truck drivers are the last sweatshop industry in America,” Adams said.
“Almost 20 percent of the trucks and drivers have a safety violation every year,” he said. “Two percent of the drivers have alcohol and drug safety violations.”
This Blog Selected as one of the "Top 75 Truck Sites!"
I am pleased to report that my blog on trucking litigation has been selected as one of the Top 75 Truck Sites on the internet! The selection criteria states:
Truck Injury Lawyer Blog It’s all fun and games until you or your truck gets hurt, and if that’s the case then this is the guy you want to talk to.
I am pleased that my hard work over the years to inform the public of trucking issues has been recognized. For a full list of the Top 75 Truck Sites see the original posting here.
Underride Collsions Preventible Tragedies
A new study, discussed below, by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows that rear truck underride guards are inadequate, and collisions like the one shown above should never have the catastrophic damages that they so often do in the US.
Now there are many reasons that cars hit tractor trailers in the rear, sometimes it is the cars fault, sometimes it is the trucks fault. I have handled many of these cases when it has been determined that it has been the trucks fault. However the third party involved in these collisions, the 800 pound gorilla that is often overlooked by lawyers not familiar with trucking cases, is the trailer manufacturer. Why should they be involved? Because trailer manufacturer's have know since at least the 1970's (that I personally know of) how to decrease the severity of these collisions by making solid underride guards, at minimal cost and expense, and have done nothing about it.
So what did the IIHS report of March 1, 2011 (link to the study here), find? At a 35 MPH collision the guards would "buckle or break away from their trailers - with deadly consequences [for the occupants of cars]." Europe and Canada have stronger standards that protect the occupants of the car from passenger compartment intrusion.
Thus a car in a 35mph impact with a trailer with a weak underride guard looks like this:
A car in a 35mph impact with a strong underride guard looks like this:
Since industry steadfastly refuses to act I can only hope that the government will respond favorably to IIHS' s Petition for stronger underride guards.
Trucking Lawyer Helps Nationwide
I was happy to learn that a local paper, The Hamilton County Herald ( www.hamiltoncountyherald.com ), wanted to do an article on my practice, the full article published December 31, 2010 can be found here and is pasted below:
Locally based truck accident lawyer helps nationwide
If there’s one thing attorney Morgan Adams doesn’t need, it’s more work. As a nationally recognized trucking litigation expert who represents victims of accidents involving large commercial vehicles, he has more than enough cases to keep him busy. So he spends a lot of time trying to prevent accidents from happening.
“People think it’s funny that I give out tips to help them avoid being hit by a tractor trailer, but I don’t need more work. There are enough trucking cases, and there will continue to be plenty of them, even if everyone does everything as close to right as humanly possible,” he says.
Some of the tips Adams doles out might seem unconventional, but make sense, including a tidbit that could save lives in rush hour traffic.
“One of the top causes of truck accidents is fatigued drivers. You might think having your foot on your brakes will tell everyone behind you you’re stopped, but when a truck driver has been on the road too long, a solid light doesn’t register as well as blinking lights, so if you’re going less than the minimum speed on the interstate, turn on your emergency lights until at least five cars behind you have slowed down or stopped. Blinking lights help to alert a fatigued truck driver that there’s a problem up ahead,” he says.
Adams hopes his advice has the same effect on those who hear it.
“I consult on hundreds of cases a year, and none of my clients woke up that morning and said, ‘Hot diggity dang, I’m going to be in a car wreck today!’ They had lives with focus and direction, and a truck wreck decimated their plans,” he says.
Case in point: a young Smith County, Tenn., woman whose life was changed when the van in which she was a passenger collided with a commercial vehicle and she suffered a mild traumatic brain injury. Adams helped her to secure the largest recovery for a living plaintiff to date in the county.
“We had experts from around the country diagnose and explain how she hit her head when the wreck occurred, and that as a result, her future changed dramatically in an instant. So one of the things she’s going to be able to do, since she can’t work full time, is provide medical care for herself for the rest of her life,” he says.
Adams’ work has also impacted how certain laws are interpreted. For example, he argued the first reported case in federal court in Tennessee that found that a violation of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations is negligence per se.
“I’m pretty proud of that legal victory and of the fact that it was deemed important enough to report,” he says.
Adams decided to focus on trucking accidents when he was involved in a case in which a cement mixer rolled over a family in a minivan. A baby suffered brain damage from the wreck and was in intensive care for several days.
“The mixer driver, who was a caring man with children of his own, had never been told by his company that a loaded cement mixer could roll over at 12 mph on a turn. Had the company properly trained the driver, I believe he would have followed his training and the wreck never would have happened,” he says, adding that the company now has a training program for new drivers.
Adams has not always fought on behalf of victims. When he started focusing on truck accident litigation ten years ago, he was on the opposite side of the battle. He says his work for major insurance companies cost him a lot of sleep.
“I’d gotten distressed that a great verdict for my clients meant I’d robbed people who deserved recovery, whether that was because they hadn’t dotted all of their I’s and crossed all of their T’s or some other reason. I knew I’d represented my client well, but I didn’t feel good about what I was doing to individuals,” he says.
The turning point for Adams came when he was asked to formalize a settlement and hand a $5,000 check to a father and the sole supporter of a family. Adams asked the man how he was doing, and the man described symptoms that made it clear he had a bulging disc and would likely need surgery. Since Adams was not the man’s representative, he couldn’t tell the man he was settling for much less than his case was worth.
“I knew he was crazy to settle for $5,000, and the insurance company knew it, but didn’t care. I stopped doing insurance defense work shortly thereafter. And I’d never slept better,” he says.
Adams needed the rest, as he would devote thousands of hours to learning the ins and outs of commercial vehicle accident litigation. His work in the area became his passion, and as he represented more and more victims of catastrophic accidents, he developed a national reputation. Today, he has offices in Nashville and Chattanooga, and is known across the country as “The Truck Accident Lawyer.”
In addition to representing his own clients, Adams helps attorneys across the U.S. understand the liability and damage issues in their trucking cases. His current workload includes cases in California, Nebraska and other states, many of which he handles in person due to their complex nature. Adams also lectures across the country on how to properly handle tractor-trailer cases. Over the next four months, he’s slated to teach CLE courses in New York, Rhode Island, Louisiana and Idaho.
In addition to his lecture work, Adams has written a chapter titled “Trucking Accident Litigation” for the 2010-2011 edition of “Handling Motor Vehicle Accident Cases.” For lawyers who wish to digest similar material in smaller chunks, Adams publishes a blog, accessible at www.truckinjurylawyerblog.com.
While Adams is happy to share his expertise, keeping up with the latest developments in his field requires a significant investment of time.
“It’s an incredibly technical field. To be equipped to handle a trucking case, you have to be constantly involved in the changing safety regulations and dealing with the physics and dynamics and experts involved. It requires a lot of time and effort to stay on top of what’s happening,” he says.
Adams became a lawyer while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. Following Desert Storm in the early ’90s, he returned to the private sector and took a job with Luther Anderson in Chattanooga. Two years later, he moved over to what was then Hatfield, VanCleave & Akers.
When Akers left to become Hamilton County’s clerk and master, Adams struck out on his own. For a time, he concentrated on family law, and specifically father’s custody. Adams was the first lawyer to convince a Hamilton County judge to allow a father to have his child on Christmas morning.
There’s a touch of irony in Adams’ history with family law, because if there’s one thing he needs more of, it’s time with his wife and three sons. He says he tries to “get home as many nights a year” as he can, but that his work is demanding.
“My wife would not be shy in saying I work too much. But I’m passionate about representing the people who have entrusted this once-in-a-lifetime event to my care,” he says, adding that his wife is “not the better half, but the better nine-tenths,” and that his boys are “smarter than he is, even if they’re not old enough to read [this article] in print.”
When discussing his life and career, Adams seems honest and forthright. But he’s concerned people have the wrong idea about his work: He’s not anti-trucking, he says, but anti-negligence.
“There are a lot of good truck drivers out there, and a lot of good trucking companies. But some trucking companies abuse their drivers, and some truck drivers choose to skirt safety regulations. When they do that, I tend to get involved and try to hold the companies and the drivers accountable.”
That’s bad news for negligent truck drivers and trucking companies, because if there’s one thing they need, besides a willingness to follow the rules, it’s less of Morgan Adams.
State Laws Regarding Cell Phone Use and Texting While Driving
Driver distraction, to include cell phone use, is a major cause of wrecks. This is a huge issue in the trucking industry as truck drivers are required to frequently update their company and are on the road weeks at a time, leaving the cell phone their only means of communication with vendors, friends, and family.
Proving that a truck or bus driver was actually texting while driving, or on a cell phone, is difficult and generally requires a lawyer. Records must be subpoened from the service provider. These records are often destroyed after a few months, thus having a lawyer fighting for you in a serious truck or bus accident case is critical.
Paralegal superstar Janabeth Fleming Taylor recently sent me the link to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's list of cell phone laws in the US. The list can be seen here and is pasted below for your convenience.
Cellphone laws
July 2010
A jurisdiction-wide ban on driving while talking on a hand-held cellphone is in place in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Utah, and Washington) and the District of Columbia. Utah has named the offense careless driving. Under the Utah law, no one commits an offense when speaking on a cellphone unless they are also committing some other moving violation other than speeding.
Local jurisdictions may or may not need specific state statutory authority to ban cellphones. Localities that have enacted restrictions on cellphone use include: Oahu, HI; Chicago, IL; Brookline, MA; Detroit, MI; Santa Fe, NM; Brooklyn, North Olmstead, and Walton Hills, OH; Conshohocken, Lebanon, and West Conshohocken, PA; Waupaca County, WI; and Cheyenne, WY.
The use of all cellphones while driving a school bus is prohibited in 19 states and the District of Columbia.
The use of all cellphones by novice drivers is restricted in 28 states and the District of Columbia.
Text messaging is banned for all drivers in 30 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, novice drivers are banned from texting in 8 states (Alabama, Indiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia) and school bus drivers are banned from text messaging in 2 states (Oklahoma, and Texas).
The table below shows the states that have cellphone laws, whether they specifically ban text messaging, and whether they are enforced as primary or secondary laws. Under secondary laws, an officer must have some other reason to stop a vehicle before citing a driver for using a cellphone. Laws without this restriction are called primary.
| Laws restricting cellphone use and texting | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State | Hand-held ban | Young drivers all cellphone ban | Bus drivers all cellphone ban | Texting ban | Enforcement |
| Alabama | no | drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months | no | drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months | primary |
| Alaska | no | no | no | all drivers | primary |
| Arizona | no | no | school bus drivers | no | primary |
| Arkansas | drivers 18 or older but younger than 21 | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary: texting by all drivers and cellphone use by school bus drivers; secondary: cellphone use by young drivers1 |
| California | all drivers | drivers younger than 18 | school and transit bus drivers | all drivers | primary; secondary for hands-free cellphone use by young drivers1 |
| Colorado | no | drivers younger than 18 | no | all drivers | primary |
| Connecticut | all drivers | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Delaware | all drivers (effective 01/02/11) | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | school bus drivers | all drivers (effective 01/02/11) | primary |
| District of Columbia | all drivers | learner's permit holders | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Florida | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Georgia | no | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Hawaii | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Idaho | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Illinois | drivers in construction and school speed zones | drivers younger than 19 and learner's permit holders younger than 19 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Indiana | no | drivers younger than 18 | no | drivers younger than 18 | primary |
| Iowa | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | no | all drivers | primary for learner's permit and intermediate license holders; secondary for texting |
| Kansas | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | no | all drivers | primary |
| Kentucky | no | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Louisiana | with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 | with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary2 (effective 08/15/10) |
| Maine | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | primary |
| Maryland | all drivers (effective 10/01/10) | learner's permit and provisional license holders younger than 18 (effective 10/01/10) | school bus drivers (hand-held ban) (effective 10/01/10) | all drivers | secondary; primary for texting |
| Massachusetts | no | drivers younger than 18 (effective 09/30/10) | school bus drivers (effective since 4/12/01) and passenger bus drivers (effective 09/30/10) | all drivers (effective 09/30/10) | primary |
| Michigan | no | no | no | all drivers | primary |
| Minnesota | no | learner's permit holders and provisional license holders during the first 12 months after licensing | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Mississippi | no | no | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | primary |
| Missouri | no | no | no | drivers 21 and younger | primary |
| Montana | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Nebraska | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders younger than 18 | no | all drivers | secondary |
| Nevada | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| New Hampshire | no | no | no | all drivers | primary |
| New Jersey | all drivers | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| New Mexico | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| New York | all drivers | no | no | all drivers | primary; secondary for text messaging |
| North Carolina | no | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| North Dakota | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Ohio | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Oklahoma | learner's permit and intermediate license holders (effective 11/01/10) | no3 | school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) | learner's permit holders, intermediate license holders, school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) | primary (effective 11/01/10) |
| Oregon | all drivers | drivers younger than 18 | no | all drivers | primary |
| Pennsylvania | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Rhode Island | no | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| South Carolina | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| South Dakota | no | no | no | no | not applicable |
| Tennessee | no | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | school bus drivers | all drivers | primary |
| Texas | drivers in school crossing zones | intermediate license holders for the first twelve months | bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present | bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present; intermediate license holders for first twelve months; drivers in school crossing zones | primary |
| Utah | all drivers | no | no | all drivers | primary for texting; secondary for talking on a hand-held cellphone4 |
| Vermont | no | drivers younger than 18 | no | all drivers | primary |
| Virginia | no | drivers younger than 18 | school bus drivers | all drivers | secondary; primary for school bus drivers |
| Washington | all drivers | learner's permit and intermediate license holders | no | all drivers | primary |
| West Virginia | no | drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license | no | drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license | primary |
| Wisconsin | no | no | no | all drivers (effective 12/01/10) | primary (effective 12/01/10) |
| Wyoming | no | no | no | all drivers | primary |
1The laws in Arkansas and California prohibit police from stopping a vehicle to determine if a driver is in compliance with the law. Clearly, that language prohibits the use of checkpoints to enforce the law, but it has been interpreted as the functional equivalent of secondary provisions that typically state the officer may not stop someone suspected of a violation unless there is other, independent, cause for a stop.
2In Louisiana, all learner's permit holders, irrespective of age, and all intermediate license holders are prohibited from driving while using a hand-held cellphone and all drivers younger than 18 are prohibited from using any cellphone. Effective April 1, 2010 all drivers, irrespective of age, issued a first driver’s license will be prohibited from using a cellphone for one year. The cellphone ban is secondary for novice drivers age 18 and older.
3In Oklahoma, learner's permit and intermediate license holders are banned from using a hand-held electronic device while operating a motor vehicle for non-life-threatening emergency purposes.
4Utah's law defines careless driving as committing a moving violation (other than speeding) while distracted by use of a hand-held cellphone or other activities not related to driving.
US SUPREME COURT DETERMINES PRINCIPLE PLACE OF BUSINESS FOR CORPORATIONS
The United States Supreme Court recently held that the principle place of business for a corporation, for purposes of determining whether a federal court has diversity jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1332(c)(1), is that place where:
a corporation’s officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities. It is the place that Courts of Appeals have called the corporation’s “nerve center.” And in practice it should normally be the place where the corporation maintains its headquarters—provided that the headquarters is the actual center of direction, control, and coordination, i.e., the “nerve center,” and not simply an office where the corporation holds its board meetings (for example, attended by directors and officers who have traveled there for the occasion).
Determining the proper "principle place of business" for a trucking company is critical because it tells an experienced truck accident lawyer where the proper place to file a truck injury lawsuit.
Read the full opinion in Hertz v. Friend, No. 08-1107 (USSC 2/23/10) here.
Advanced Trucking Litigation College - October 2009 - American Association for Justice
Some of the best trucking lawyers in the country recently got together in Atlanta and spent a week teaching other lawyers the tricks and traps of handling a truck, bus or other commercial motor vehicle case. I have not been posting for the last month as my time has been consumed by getting this program together. Robert Collins, from Texas, was the co-moderator and as much time as I put into this program, he put in more. All the TEACHERS were pleased with how much they learned, the students were ecstatic!
The AAJ Advanced Trucking Litigation College is exactly the type of program you want a lawyer handling your trucking case to attend. Hiring a competent lawyer to handle your case is the most critical thing you can do to get a good result in your case. The facts won't change, but gathering those facts, and making sure they are presented to a judge or jury, is critical. Not everyone knows which rocks to look under at a trucking company headquarters.
Before you hire a lawyer for any type of case make sure they are educated on the subject and not a "one size fits all" lawyer. If you have a good case you can hire the best lawyer, from in state or out of state, to handle it and it won't cost you any more money. If the lawyer you want to hire can't take your case he or she can frequently get you to someone in your area that focus' on the specific area involved in your case.
My firm has referral lawyers for trucking cases in every state. In addition to the cases I have handled in Tennessee and Georgia, I recently resolved a case in Nebraska and just finished consulting in trucking cases in California and New York city. If my firm can't get involved in a case (we don't take every case), we always try to get the case to a lawyer with trucking experience in the appropriate state.
The Truck Accident Lawyers at the Law Offices of Morgan Adams concentrate in protecting the rights of those who were seriously injured or lost a loved one in an accident with a commercial truck or bus. Our lawyers are based in Tennessee, but serve clients throughout the nation. If you or someone you love has been seriously hurt by a careless driver, don’t sign anything the trucking company gives you -- contact us as soon as possible at 800-580-4878 or by email to learn more at a free, confidential consultation.
Morgan Adams is a trial attorney licensed in Tennessee and Georgia. He is listed as a "Mid-South SuperLawyer" (Limited to the top 5% of the lawyers in Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas), is a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum (limited to lawyers who have recovered 1 million dollars or more for their clients), and is the Chair of the American Association of Justice's Interstate Trucking Litigation Group. He has served as chair of the Tennessee Association of Justice's Trucking Litigation seminars since 2004, and is a frequent speaker at national legal education programs, training lawyers to properly handle injury cases involving commercial vehicles.
Responsibility for Truck Rollovers
In a Tractor Trailer rollovers, who is to blame is frequently a major issue. Federal regulations generally require the driver to bear responsibility for the loading, and faulty loading, of the trailer. However an exception is made for loads that are sealed. www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.asp Who then is responsible? Generally speaking it is the company that loaded and sealed the trailer. Frequently these companies point at the driver and blame him for excessive speed and allege this is the real cause of the collision. While this may be a cause in wrecks, there are a number where the driver is as much of a victim as any other innocent party and, it is the company that improperly loaded the trailer who is truly at fault.
In 2002 new rules on securing cargo were adopted that went into effect Jan 1, 2004. www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/truck/vehicle/cs-policy.htm The new rules require motor carriers to change the way they use cargo securement devices to prevent articles from shifting on or within, or falling from commercial motor vehicles. The changes may require motor carriers to increase the number of tie-downs used to secure certain types of cargo. If you have a case where a truck rolled over, or material fell off of a truck. these rules would also apply to those companies loading and sealing trailers. It is critical that experts be retained as soon as possible to determine if a cargo securement issue is involved in a collision, and to determine who is at fault for the improperly loaded trailer.
Driver Factors in Truck Wrecks
The federal government has listed the reasons that truck drivers are involved in collisions. According to the FMCSA 2007 report on the 2005 crash results, the top 10 causes of truck accidents, where the truck driver is a fault, are:
- Failure to keep in proper lane
- Driving too fast for Conditions
- Fatigue
- Failure to yield right of way
- Overcorrecting
- Erratic or reckless driving
- Illegal Drug use (By experience this would also include prescription and over the counter drug use)
- Illegal maneuver, improper turn
- Failure to obey Traffic signs
- Cell phones
Bad Drivers on the Road Due to Driver Shortages
The American Trucking Association estimated in 2005 that by 2014 there would be a shortage of 111,000 drivers. This shortage of drivers frequently causes trucking companies to hire drivers that are unqualified rather than having to turn down lucrative trucking contracts.
It is critical in a trucking case to have the Driver's Qualification File reviewed by an experienced lawyer to see if the trucking company knowingly hired an unqualified driver.
