Truck accidents hurt or kill thousands of motorists, passengers, and pedestrians each year. Sometimes, even truckers themselves perish in these accidents.
A recent case illustrates the challenges that arose when a deceased trucker’s family attempted to seek compensation for their loved one’s wrongful death in a lawsuit that claimed a particular braking system caused the trucker to lose control and plunge off an overpass.
There are many different kinds of shopping – grocery shopping, back-to-school shopping – but there’s one kind of shopping of which you probably haven’t heard, unless you’re in the legal field. So-called “forum shopping” refers to a situation in which opposing parties in a lawsuit seek to have their dispute heard in a particular court because of a perceived advantage in that forum.
Of course, there are limitations to forum shopping. Usually, the dispute boils down to which of two or three possible courts should have jurisdiction. When multiple suits are filed in differing jurisdictions, it is up to the appellate court to make a final determination as to the court in which the matter will proceed.
Humanitarian group Oxfam America recently issued a report about the working conditions of poultry workers in the United States. The group detailed the plight of those who work in America’s most popular meat industry, concluding that poultry workers earn low wages, suffer many injuries and illnesses, and often work in a climate of fear. It was another issue that made national headlines, however. According to the report, many poultry workers have to wear diapers to work because they are denied adequate bathroom breaks while on the line.
As demeaning as it must be to the workers who suffer this indignity, there are others who have been even more adversely affected by the relentless demands of the poultry industry. On an early November morning in 2013, a Texas family’s life was forever changed when they were struck from behind by a truck owned by poultry giant Sanderson Farms. The employee who was driving the truck reportedly later admitted to his girlfriend that he had fallen asleep at the wheel. He had arisen at 5:30 a.m., intent on arriving in Chilton by 7:00 a.m., where he worked 10 to 16 hours per shift.
After a lawsuit is filed in a car accident or other negligence case, the next step is to engage in discovery. This can include interrogatories (written questions), requests for documents, and requests for admissions being exchanged between the parties, with each side being required to provide certain information within a reasonable time. Once written discovery is finished, the next step is typically the taking of oral (and, sometimes, video) depositions.
Depositions may be taken for discovery (to learn more about the facts of the case) or for proof (to be presented at court in lieu of a witness’ appearance). If the parties are unable to agree on the scope of discovery, it is the trial court judge’s job to make a ruling on any disputes that arise. If a party is dissatisfied with a judge’s ruling, it is sometimes possible to seek the review of a higher, appellate-level court.
A recent petition for a writ of mandamus illustrates this procedure.
Sometimes what appears to be an “open and shut case” is anything but. For instance, let’s say that an 18-wheeler, driven by a man with cocaine in his system, plows into the back of a car that is stopped in traffic, and a woman is killed.
How long should it take to resolve such an obvious case of liability? Although the accident happened in 2006, the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas recently issued an opinion in a case that – 10 years later – is still not fully resolved.
When pursing a personal injury case against a negligent or reckless driver, it is in the plaintiff’s best interests to thoroughly investigate all theories of liability and identify all potential defendants prior to filing suit. If the driver was employed and arguably “on the job” at the time of the collision, his or her employer may be named in the lawsuit in addition to the driver himself or herself. In many cases, the employer has “deeper pockets” (i.e., more assets or higher insurance coverage limits), so a finding of liability can result in a more adequate financial recovery for the injured person.
Of course, the employer may have an argument that the employee was not acting in the course of employment at the time of the accident, thus relieving the employer of potential liability under a theory of respondeat superior (by which the master may be held liable for the torts of the servant). The employer may also have possible defenses against an allegation of negligent entrustment or another cause of action by the injured person.
Parties to a personal injury lawsuit may agree to settle the claims for a variety of reasons. By agreeing to settle, the parties clearly avoid the prospect of presenting their case to a jury, as well as an unknown result. And in most instances, settling matters serves to shorten the duration of the case, and this can save the parties time and money. But plenty of car and truck accident cases are brought to a jury for their determination. It may not always be in a plaintiff’s best interests to settle a claim. In order to determine the ideal strategy for your particular negligence case, you are strongly encouraged to consult with an experienced injury attorney from the local East Texas area.
If your case does go to trial, it is important to understand the jury’s role and the relative weight given to their ultimate findings. During a trial, members of the jury are the parties responsible for weighing the facts and determining the credibility of witnesses and parties. The manner in which an appeals court reviews the lower court findings depends in part on the type of challenge set forth. In a recent truck accident case, the plaintiffs appealed a “take-nothing” judgment in a lawsuit against another driver.
A plaintiff in a personal injury case must establish “causation” between the accident or event and the injuries sustained. More specifically, under Texas law, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s conduct caused an event that in turn caused the plaintiff to suffer injuries. Furthermore, when an injured party seeks to recover medical expenses, he or she must provide evidence of the conditions that generated the expenses and show that those conditions were caused by the accident. All of this must be taken very seriously. The absence of proof of causation can serve to defeat a plaintiff’s claim for damages. In order to ensure that your personal injury complaint complies with applicable law, you are strongly encouraged to contact an experienced injury attorney from the East Texas area as soon as possible after an accident.
A recent Texas Supreme Court case addressed the issue of causation and the importance of “relevant” evidence in a case. In JLG Trucking, LLC v. Garza, the plaintiff (Lauren Garza) was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler driven by an employee of JLG Trucking. Although the plaintiff did not go to the hospital after the accident, she testified that she went to an emergency clinic to have x-rays taken and that she later saw an orthopedic surgeon for complaints of back and neck pain. The doctor prescribed physical therapy. Approximately three months later, after completing 11 weeks of therapy, the plaintiff got into a second car accident, from which she was transported to a hospital near the scene. While at the hospital, the plaintiff complained of pain in her head, neck, and chest. After two MRIs, she was found to have several herniated discs in her neck, and she underwent spinal fusion surgery. She now has reduced mobility in her neck and the potential for surgery in the future.
Far too many car accidents on Texas roads involve drivers who are under the influence of alcohol or drugs. According to the Texas Department of Transportation, in 2014, there were more than 6,700 crashes that involved a DUI. In Smith County alone, there were 219 accidents in which at least one driver was intoxicated. Driving under the influence is just one example of a driver’s negligence that can cause an accident and result in injuries to others. If you have been injured in a car accident due to the fault of another (whether it involved an intoxicated driver or not), you may be entitled to recover damages for your suffering and losses. Victims are encouraged to contact a local East Texas injury attorney who can assess the case and prepare a solid claim for compensation.
The type of claim you assert depends in large part on the circumstances surrounding your accident. In a recent Texas auto accident-related case, Donnie Lee Burris died in a motor vehicle crash while driving his employer’s truck on the way to a job site. The deceased’s employer had a worker’s compensation policy with Texas Mutual Insurance Company at the time of the crash. The plaintiff, Ashley Denham, brought a workers’ compensation claim to recover death benefits on behalf of the deceased’s minor daughter. After the accident, however, an autopsy as well as blood and urine tests were conducted, and the tests revealed the presence of THC – the active ingredient in marijuana.
Car accidents are often caused by driver negligence, in some form. All too often, these accidents could have been prevented, especially in cases where a driver fails to heed traffic safety laws. Fortunately, an injured victim may be entitled to recover compensation for certain pain and losses, depending on the facts of the case and the manner in which the claim is brought. As a general rule, in order to state a claim for a recovery in an auto accident case, the injured party must “plead” and “prove” certain elements. There are many important nuances in properly setting forth a successful claim. If you have been injured in a car accident, it is important to reach out to a local East Texas injury attorney as soon as possible in order to preserve your rights to a recovery.In a typical personal injury case, the plaintiff must show that: 1) the defendant owed a duty of care to the victim, 2) the defendant breached that duty, 3) the defendant’s breach of duty was the proximate causation of the resulting harm, and 4) the plaintiff experienced actual damages. “Proximate cause” can further be explained as an event that has a causal connection to the losses that the law recognizes. In a recent Texas car accident case, Williams v. Parker, the plaintiff sought damages for the injuries sustained, alleging negligence, negligence per se, and negligent entrustment. In a unique set of facts, Lawanna Keeth was driving and crossing into oncoming traffic when she struck a tractor-trailer head-on. Keeth was a diabetic and at the scene of the accident, her blood sugar was low. She later died at the hospital.
Texas Injury Lawyer Blog