Recent Blog Posts
Fatal Pile-Up Crash in Rural Bexar County
Two people are dead following a head-on crash in eastern Bexar County that involved five vehicles, including a school bus.
Investigators state that a Toyota was initially seen weaving on Loop 1604 just north of Highway 87, not far from Adkins. The vehicle then clipped an East Central I.S.D. bus before slamming head-on into a Honda. Both drivers were killed almost instantly; a passenger in the Toyota survived for several days before succumbing to his injuries. All the victims were described as teenagers.
Two other passenger vehicles were involved in the pile-up crash as well, but none of the occupants were seriously injured.
Head-On Crashes
Statistically, these incidents are extremely rare (about 3 percent of vehicle crashes) but they have a fatality rate 12 times greater than other freeway wrecks. That is primarily due to the massive force involved. If two vehicles collide that are each traveling 60 mph, the occupants are subjected to a sudden force of 120 mph.
Loopholes
There are a number of rented vehicles, especially self-service moving trucks, on the streets and highways of South Central Texas. These trucks are often involved in car crashes, because the drivers are inexperienced and the vehicles would normally require a commercial drivers’ license. In these instances, federal law makes it difficult, but not impossible, for the victim to sue the vehicle’s owner, in addition to the negligent driver.
The Graves Amendment
In the 1990s and early 2000s, a number of states passed vicarious liability laws that applied to vehicle lessors. These laws essentially mirrored the elements of respondeat superior, by declaring that the vehicle owner was legally liable for damages caused by a vehicle lessee, at least in some cases.
Rather predictably, the vehicle rental industry strongly opposed these laws. Resistance stiffened after a Connecticut jury returned a multi-milliondollar verdict against a leasing company which then announced plans to cease doing business in the state. So, in 2005, Congress included 49 U.S.C. 30106, the “Graves Amendment,” as a last-minute attachment to an omnibus bill. There is almost no legislative history backing up the Amendment: no hearings were ever conducted and there was less than a half- hour of floor debate.
No Signal Yet
Local residents claim a serious car crash would not have taken place had Bexar County followed through on its commitment to erect a traffic signal at a dangerous intersection on the Northwest Side.
The latest crash at the intersection of Blanco Road (F.M. 2696) and Slumber Pass killed one person and sent two others to the hospital. The male driver of one car was killed and two female passengers in the other car were injured. About a year ago, the county earmarked nearly $145,000 to put up a signal and hired a contractor to do so, but construction has yet to begin. The Bexar County Director of Public Works stated that “a year doesn’t sound like it’s quick, but it takes that long to get equipment sometimes.” The DPW added that the driver was allegedly speeding and serving and so a traffic signal would not have prevented the crash.
The county says the signal is expected to be installed in the next two weeks and to be functional by mid-December.
Three-Vehicle Pinball Crash in San Antonio
A runaway ambulance rear-ended a woman sitting at a stoplight in the Northeast Side, sending her to the hospital with serious injuries.
The crash took place at the intersection of Sunshadow and Perrin Beitel Road. After it slammed into her car, the ambulance continued going forward until it smacked into a traffic light pole. Meanwhile, the force of the collision propelled the woman’s vehicle into the intersection and into the path of an SUV making a left turn. The SUV driver was unable to avoid a collision, and the vehicle spun several times before eventually coming to rest against a utility pole.
Aside from the woman, no other injuries were reported.
Third Party Liability
Normally, when a commercial vehicle like a tractor-trailer, delivery truck, or taxicab is involved in a crash, the employer is liable for damages under the theory of respondeat superior. However, when an emergency vehicle is involved, the plaintiff may need to prove additional facts.
The Burden of Proof
In one of the more notorious trials of the 1990s, a popular actor and former football star was tried for a double murder that occurred not far from his home in California. While a criminal jury found the man not guilty of murder, a civil jury ordered him to pay $25 million following a subsequent wrongful death lawsuit. The man’s moral guilt or innocence is not really relevant to the discussion at hand: the point is that the burden of proof is much lower in a civil proceeding like a car crash case than in a criminal or family law case.
Civil Case
In nearly all negligence cases, the plaintiff must prove liability by a preponderance of the evidence, which means “more likely than not.” Some people use the analogy of the scales of justice that tip in one direction or the other. But a more accurate image is to picture two equally-full glasses of water sitting side by side. If a person adds one drop to the glass on the right, it contains more water than the glass on the left.
Figuring Out Fault
Whether they realize it or not, most people are familiar with the concept of comparative fault. How does this idea play out in car crash cases?
Almost inevitably, when two siblings, two workers, two schoolchildren, or two athletes get into a fight, they will give markedly different answers to the question of “who started it?” Although premeditated sneak attacks are not unheard of, at least when children are involved, the truth is that both parties are almost always somewhat at fault. In these situations, the parent, supervisor, teacher, referee, or coach must apportion blame according to the applicable rules and assess the proper punishment.
The Rule
The same thing is true in many negligence cases, particularly intersection collisions and freeway wrecks. Each driver blames the other one for the crash. The applicable rule is found in Chapter 33 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Essentially, the plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by the percentage of his or her fault. Moreover, if the defendant is not at least 51 percent negligent, the plaintiff recovers nothing.
Shut Out
Without an effective attorney, the jury may never hear what may be the most compelling evidence in a car crash case. Worse yet, the evidence may not even be available to begin with.
Event Data Recorders
Many people are familiar with the “black boxes,” or flight data recorders, that are standard in commercial airplanes. But many people are unaware that there is probably a similar device in the cars, trucks, and vans that they drive every day. What makes this evidence so valuable is that, unlike eyewitness testimony, it basically cannot be challenged and its reliability cannot reasonably be questioned.
Almost ten years ago, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration issues a rule concerning event data recorders, or EDRs. In addition to making them mandatory for all new cars sold in the United States, the regulation set forth a number of metrics that these devices must capture and record. This data includes:
Going Through the Door?
Generally speaking, Texas laws regarding alcohol provider liability when it pertains to alcohol-related car crashes is slanted in favor of defendants. The Lone Star State did not even have a dram shop liability law until the 1980s while many other states have had similar laws on the books for nearly a century. The same is true for social host liability. Since 1993, Texas courts have consistently refused to impose liability on social hosts. But a case from the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in Houston may have opened a back door in these matters.
The Case
The dispute in Plunkett v. Nall began at a New Years’ Eve party in 2007. The defendants had a plan in place to discourage drunken driving: they set a rule that all guests remaining at midnight who had consumed alcohol must stay the night at their home. But they did not enforce this rule by confiscating keys or taking any similar measures. So, an “inebriated” guest and his “female friend” tried to leave the party at about 2:00 a.m. While the plaintiff stood on the running board and tried to remove the keys from the ignition, the driver suddenly accelerated; the plaintiff was thrown off of the SUV and injured.
Establishing Employer Liability in a Negligence Case
Many courts in South Central Texas and elsewhere are wrestling with the question of “who is a legal employee,” especially as far as car crashes are concerned, in the redesigned post-financial crisis economy. A long-term dispute between FedEx truckers and managers in California recently ended with a decision that these workers are employees, although that ruling may be appealed. In a similar vein, it looks as if the Uber lawsuit, which raises similar issues, may drag on for quite some time.
Who is an Employee?
Although one might think that such a simple question would have a fairly concise legal answer, that is not the case. One thing is for certain: the court, and not the employer, decides who is and who is not an employee. There are four general approaches:
- Economic Realities Test: The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which includes Texas, has used this approach in the past. It asks whether or not the worker is economically dependent on the employer; the answer is nearly always “yes.”
What Makes Truck Wrecks So Serious?
Although there are some twists and turns along the way, Interstate 35 runs in almost a straight line between the Mexican border at Laredo and the Canadian border at Duluth, Minnesota. Especially in the post-North American Free Trade Agreement era, Interstate 35 is one of the primary trucking lanes for various goods, and also a prime spot for major truck crashes. These wrecks are very different from passenger car crashes, in several important ways.
Evidence
All successful negligence cases are built one piece of evidence at a time, and the building blocks are significantly different in these cases.
- Driving History: Most commercial truckers have out-of-state drivers’ licenses, so their driving histories are more difficult to access.
- Federal Requirements: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is the primary agency in charge of truck and truck driver safety.