Exploring Negligence in Rear-End Collisions with Tractor-Trailers: A Florida Legal Perspective
In the realm of personal injury law, accidents involving tractor-trailers often bring up complex issues surrounding negligence, especially when the trailers in question lack appropriate rear guards. A recent case involving Wabash National, which faced a substantial verdict related to inadequate rear guards, highlights the significance of understanding negligence and the applicable legal guidelines. This blog will delve into the potential to argue negligence in such scenarios under Florida law, discuss the current guidelines for rear guards on tractor-trailers, and explore how Florida’s 2023 HB 827 law impacts these cases.
Understanding Negligence in Rear-End Collisions
Negligence is a cornerstone of personal injury claims, determining liability when an accident occurs. In Florida, to establish negligence, you need to demonstrate the following elements:
- Duty of Care: The defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff to act with reasonable care.
- Breach of Duty: The defendant breached that duty.
- Causation: The breach of duty directly caused the plaintiff’s injuries.
- Damages: The plaintiff suffered damages as a result of the breach
When it comes to rear-end collisions involving tractor-trailers, the focus is often on whether the trailer’s rear guard system was adequate. If a trailer lacks proper rear guards, it may be argued that the truck owner or manufacturer breached their duty to ensure safety, particularly if the rear guard was not compliant with relevant guidelines.
Case in Point: The Wabash National Verdict
In a recent case, Wabash National was found liable for $462 million after a rear-end collision involving one of their trailers resulted in fatalities. The jury determined that the trailer lacked appropriate rear guards, which significantly contributed to the severity of the accident. Essentially, Plaintiff’s counsel successfully argued that, despite not being at-fault for this accident, had Wabash had appropriate rear guards installed on this trailer, their clients may not have been fatally injured in this accident.
Applicable Guidelines for Rear Guards
Rear impact guards, or rear underride guards, are crucial safety features designed to prevent vehicles from sliding under the back of a trailer during a collision. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) set guidelines for these guards, but they may vary in terms of enforcement and application.
- FMCSA Regulations: Under federal regulations, all trailers manufactured after January 26, 1998, must be equipped with rear impact guards that meet specific performance standards. These guards must be designed to withstand a collision and prevent vehicles from penetrating under the trailer.
- Current Standards: According to FMCSA standards, the rear guard must be positioned no more than 22 inches from the ground and extend the full width of the trailer. It should be robust enough to absorb and dissipate the force of a collision. However, despite these regulations, there are ongoing debates about the adequacy of these standards and the effectiveness of current rear guard designs.
Wabash National Case: In the Wabash National case, the argument centered on whether the rear guards met these standards and whether the lack of advanced safety technology contributed to the accident. According to a statement on the company’s website, the accident occurred nearly two decades after the trailer involved was manufactured by Wabash in compliance with all existing regulatory standards.. The evidence presented by Plaintiff’s showed that “Wabash failed to build safer RIGs for 30 years and this would have cost Wabash about $15 million a year.” The jury awarded punitive damages at $450 million, which was the estimated amount Wabash saved by failing to include the safer RIGs for those 30 years.
The Wabash case was tried in St. Louis, Missouri.
In Florida, however, defense is allowed to introduce evidence of a Plaintiff’s negligence.
Comparative Negligence in Florida
Florida follows a comparative negligence system, which can influence the allocation of damages in an accident. This system allows for a reduction in damages based on the plaintiff’s degree of fault.
Former Pure Comparative Negligence System: Prior to March 2023 in Florida, even if a plaintiff was found to be partially at fault, they can still recover damages. For example, if a plaintiff is deemed by a jury to be 30% at fault, they can recover 70% of the total damages. If they are deemed 90% at-fault for an accident, they can recover 10%, and so on.
Florida’s 2023 HB 827 Law
In March 2023, the Florida legislature passed HB 827 into law which introduced a significant shift in how comparative negligence is applied. Under this new legislation, if a party is found to be 51% or more at fault, they are barred from recovering any damages. This “51% rule” represents a substantial change from the previous system, where any degree of fault still allowed for partial recovery.
Implications of HB 827:
- Higher Threshold for Recovery: The new law sets a clear threshold—if a plaintiff is deemed to be 51% or more at fault, they cannot recover any damages. This change emphasizes the need for plaintiffs to ensure that their percentage of fault is below 51% to be eligible for compensation.
- Strategic Considerations: Plaintiffs must carefully evaluate their case and evidence to demonstrate that their fault does not exceed 50%. Defendants will likely leverage this rule to argue that plaintiffs bear a significant portion of the fault, aiming to disqualify them from receiving any damages.
Example Scenario: Imagine a rear-end collision involving a tractor-trailer with inadequate rear guards. The plaintiff, who was speeding at the time, won his verdict based on the argument that had the trailer had proper rear guards installed, they may not have died. Therefore they successfully convinced the jury that Wabash contributed to the severity of the injuries. Under Florida’s new comparative negligence system, however, if a jury determines that this particular plaintiff who was found to be speeding while intoxicated and without seatbelts was more than 51%, they would have recovered nothing, regardless of the trailer’s rear guard inadequacies. In Florida, there is a presumption of negligence for rear-end collisions. Add the speeding, intoxication, and lack of seatbelts, and this award of damages in Florida would likely have been $0.
Practical Considerations
For Plaintiffs:
- Gathering Evidence: To support a negligence claim, plaintiffs should collect evidence showing that the trailer lacked appropriate rear guards and how this contributed to the accident. This includes obtaining expert opinions on the adequacy of the rear guards and the impact of their absence.
- Demonstrating Fault: It is crucial to establish that the plaintiff’s fault is less than 51% to recover damages. This involves proving that their actions did not significantly contribute to the accident compared to the deficiencies in the trailer’s safety features.
For Defendants:
- Challenging Fault: Defendants will focus on highlighting the plaintiff’s contributory negligence and arguing that their actions were a major factor in the collision.
- Mitigating Liability: Defendants may also argue that even if the rear guards were inadequate, the plaintiff’s actions were primarily responsible for the accident.
Conclusion
Accidents involving rear-end collisions with tractor-trailers present intricate legal challenges, particularly when it comes to arguing negligence based on inadequate rear guards. Understanding the applicable guidelines for rear guards, navigating Florida’s comparative negligence system, and considering the impact of the 2023 HB 827 law are essential for both plaintiffs and defendants. As laws and regulations evolve, staying informed and strategically addressing these issues can greatly influence the outcome of such cases. Consulting with legal experts and thoroughly analyzing the circumstances of the accident are crucial steps in pursuing or defending against claims involving tractor-trailers and rear impact guards.
If you are injured in an accident, call Jaime “Mr. 787 Abogado” Suarez today to Get You Paid!
