Common Defenses Used by Trucking Companies in Accident Claims

A crash involving a large commercial truck can leave victims with serious injuries. These victims may be eligible for financial compensation if they can show the crash resulted from the negligence of a trucker, the trucking company, or other such party.

Unfortunately, victims often face an uphill battle against powerful trucking companies and their insurance providers in the aftermath of a trucking accident. Trucking companies often employ sophisticated legal strategies to minimize their liability and reduce potential payouts.

If you’re filing a truck wreck claim or lawsuit, it’s important to understand how trucking companies defend themselves in these circumstances. This knowledge can mean the difference between receiving fair compensation and walking away empty-handed.

The insights here will help you prepare to navigate the complex landscape of trucking accident litigation. We’ll delve into the most frequently used defenses, explain their legal basis, and offer strategies to counter them effectively.

Executive Summary

• Trucking companies use various defenses to minimize liability in accident claims
• Common defenses include:
  • Comparative negligence
  • Sudden emergency doctrine
  • Challenging causation
  • Claiming FMCSR compliance
  • Independent contractor argument
• Effective counter-strategies involve:
  • Gathering comprehensive evidence
  • Obtaining expert testimony
  • Thorough accident scene documentation
  • Prompt filing to avoid statute of limitations issues
• Understanding these defenses is crucial for building a strong case
• Proactive preparation and anticipation of defense tactics are key to success

Understanding Trucking Companies’ Legal Defenses

Comparative Negligence

Trucking companies often cite comparative negligence when defending themselves against claims and lawsuits. This legal principle allows defendants to argue that the plaintiff’s own actions contributed to the accident, reducing the trucking company’s liability.

How it works:

• The defense attempts to prove that the plaintiff was partially at fault for the accident.
• If successful, the plaintiff’s compensation may be reduced by their percentage of fault.
• In some jurisdictions, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50% at fault, they may be barred from recovering any damages.

Counter-strategy:

To combat this defense, plaintiffs must:

• Gather comprehensive evidence demonstrating the truck driver’s negligence.
• Obtain expert testimony to reconstruct the accident and establish fault.
• Anticipate potential allegations of contributory negligence and prepare rebuttals.

Sudden Emergency Doctrine

The sudden emergency doctrine is another legal concept trucking companies sometimes invoke to absolve their drivers of responsibility. This defense argues that the driver faced an unexpected situation that required immediate action, leading to the accident.

Key elements:

• The emergency was sudden and unexpected.
• The driver did not contribute to creating the emergency.
• The driver’s response was reasonable, given the circumstances.

Challenging this defense:

• Investigate thoroughly to determine if the “emergency” was truly unexpected.
• Analyze the driver’s actions leading up to the incident.
• Consult experts to evaluate whether the driver’s response was appropriate.

Challenging Causation

It’s not uncommon for trucking companies and insurers to suggest that victims’ injuries were caused by factors other than a truck wreck. The defense may argue that pre-existing conditions or subsequent events caused the plaintiff’s damages.

Defense strategies:

• Requesting extensive medical records to find prior injuries or conditions.
• Hiring medical experts to testify that injuries are unrelated to the accident.
• Investigating the plaintiff’s post-accident activities for evidence of malingering.

Plaintiff’s response:

• Provide clear medical documentation linking injuries to the accident.
• Obtain expert testimony from treating physicians.
• Be transparent about pre-existing conditions and explain how the accident exacerbated them.

Procedural and Technical Defenses in Truck Accident Claims

Lack of Evidence

Gathering and presenting substantial evidence is critical when filing a claim. Trucking companies or insurers may refuse to pay victims if they can argue there isn’t sufficient evidence proving they’re liable. This defense becomes particularly effective when accident scenes are not adequately documented or preserved.

Countering this defense:

• Act quickly to gather and preserve evidence at the accident scene.
• Obtain police reports, witness statements, and surveillance footage.
• Engage accident reconstruction experts early in the process.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations Compliance

Trucking companies often assert that they were in full compliance with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) at the time of the accident. They may attempt to shift focus from their potential negligence by arguing they were operating in compliance with the law.

Key FMCSR Compliance Areas

Independent Contractor Defense

Some trucking companies attempt to distance themselves from liability by claiming the driver was an independent contractor rather than an employee. This could force victims to seek compensation from a driver’s personal insurance or the driver directly, potentially reducing the amount of compensation available.

Challenging this defense:

• Investigate the true nature of the relationship between the company and the driver.
• Review contracts, payment structures, and level of control exercised by the company.
• Consult with employment law experts to establish employee status.

Statute of Limitations

Trucking companies may argue that a lawsuit is barred by the statute of limitations if not filed by the legal deadline. Insurance companies could also argue that claim paperwork wasn’t submitted in a timely manner.

Avoiding this pitfall:

• Be aware of the specific statute of limitations in your jurisdiction.
• File claims promptly, even if negotiations are ongoing.
• Consider tolling agreements if nearing the deadline.

What is the most effective way to counter the comparative negligence defense in a trucking accident claim?

The most effective way to counter the comparative negligence defense is to gather comprehensive evidence demonstrating the truck driver’s negligence, obtain expert testimony to reconstruct the accident and establish fault, and anticipate potential allegations of contributory negligence by preparing strong rebuttals supported by facts and expert opinions.

Learn How Trucking Companies Defend Themselves to Secure Compensation

Trucking companies and their insurers have a wide array of legal defenses at their disposal. Understanding these tactics and defenses can help plaintiffs and their attorneys better prepare for the challenges ahead. Remember, each case is unique, and the defenses employed will vary based on the specific circumstances of the accident.

To build a strong case:

1. Act quickly to preserve evidence.
2. Thoroughly document all aspects of the accident and resulting injuries.
3. Anticipate potential defenses and prepare counterarguments in advance.
4. Engage experienced experts to support your claims.
5. Stay vigilant throughout the legal process, as new defenses may emerge.

The fact that trucking companies are prepared to defend themselves doesn’t mean you won’t receive the compensation you’re eligible for. Being proactive and informing yourself can increase your chances of overcoming common defenses.

The road to justice in trucking accident claims may be long and complex, but with the right preparation and legal support, you can navigate it with confidence. Remember, the trucking company’s defenses are just that—defenses. With a solid case and strategic approach, you can prevail and hold negligent parties accountable for their actions.

How Corena Law Can Help

At Corena Law, we understand the complexities of trucking accident claims and the sophisticated defenses trucking companies use to avoid paying victims. Our experienced team of attorneys specializes in navigating these challenging cases, armed with in-depth knowledge of industry regulations and defense tactics. We work tirelessly to build robust cases for our clients, anticipating and countering common defenses with thorough evidence gathering, expert testimony, and strategic legal arguments.

Legal Resources

• Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT): Provides information on road safety, regulations, and resources for commercial drivers. NDOT
• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA): Offers regulations and safety guidelines for trucking companies and drivers. FMCSA
• American Trucking Associations (ATA): A national organization that advocates for the trucking industry, providing resources and information on best practices. ATA