Strategy is essential in litigation. Among the most important strategic considerations is determining in which court a case may be litigated and tried. Most trucking crash cases involve an analysis of jurisdiction and venue questions.

In Georgia state courts, cases must be filed in a county where a defendant is a resident. Federal courts are options if there is complete diversity of citizenship, meaning that all plaintiffs reside in a state different from all defendants, or if there is “federal question” jurisdiction. In tractor trailer crash cases, we usually but not always file in state courts in Georgia because of the relatively more user-friendly procedures in the state court system. Occasionally, we choose to file in a federal court when available rather than a small, rural county where the trucking company and its driver are located. Most often, plaintiff attorneys file cases in state courts against out of state trucking companies and drivers based on the Nonresident Motorist jurisdiction provisions which provide for venue where the crash happened or where the injured Georgia resident resides, Then the defense usually files a notice of removal to federal court under “diversity of citizenship” jurisdiction.

Rarely does a defendant in a trucking case claim “federal question” jurisdiction in federal court. However, that happened in a case recently in which we are co-counsel in five of six cases arising from a tragic crash at the intersection of I-16 and I-96 in Pooler just outside Savannah, and preparing the briefs in all six companion cases. As the plaintiffs and two defendants are Georgians, there was no diversity jurisdiction. The last defendant served filed notices to remove all six cases from the State Court of Chatham County to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, claiming that the Shipping Act of 1984 created federal question jurisdiction. We immediately filed motions to remand all the cases back to the State Court of Chatham County.

One of the six cases was assigned to the Hon. Lisa Godby Wood in Brunswick and five were assigned to the Hon. William Moore in Savannah. Within two weeks after completion of briefing on the motions to remand, Judge Wood on January 9, 2017, granted the motion to remand in an order that has been published online in the Westlaw database. Moody, et al v. Great West, et al, 2017 WL 77417 (Wood., J.)(S.D. Ga. Jan. 9, 2017).

Under federal case law cited by Judge Wood, removal statutes are construed narrowly and uncertainties are resolved in favor of remand. This is due to respect for state sovereignty and the independence of state courts, as state courts are generally presumed competent to interpret and apply federal law. Removal is also construed narrowly because the plaintiff is the master of the claim and may avoid federal jurisdiction by exclusive reliance on state law.

Shortly thereafter, Judge Moore announced he was taking his well-earned senior status as he approached his 77th birthday.  U.S. Magistrate Judge Stan Baker of Brunswick has been nominated as his successor. A U.S. Senate confirmation hearing for Judge Baker may come around the end of the year, though apparently no one really knows. We have no idea whether there will be an order on the motions for remand in the other five cases before Judge Baker takes office.

The defendants removed these case to the Southern District Court of Georgia claiming that there were federal questions a under the Shipping Act and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Defense attorneys often attempt to remove their client’s case to a federal court in an effort to afford a higher level of protection for their out of state client who may fear a plaintiff’s “home court” advantage, or simply to bog down a case in federal court procedures that some lawyers believe are more likely to favor the defense.

However, the statutes concerning removal are construed narrowly out of respect for a state’s sovereignty and the state courts independence. To that end the Court looked to see if we had raised a federal claim or if perhaps there may have been a substantial federal question embedded somewhere in our claim.

Judge Wood’s order in January thoroughly eviscerated the claim of “federal question” jurisdiction in an intermodal trucking cases based on the Shipping Act of 1984. Judge Wood ruled that we had not raised a federal claim as our sole cause of action, wrongful death, was a state claim. While the legal theory makes reference to the Shipping Act and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which are both federal law, the Court agreed that “the mere presence of a federal issue in a state cause of action” does not make it into a federal one.

The Court then looked at whether our claim contained a substantial federal question somewhere within it. When determining if there is the possibility of an embedded federal question in a claim there are a few factors a court will look at. First it’s important to understand what might be considered substantial. Substantiality depends on how important or impactful the issue at hand is going to be when weighed against the federal system as a whole. There are no “bright line” rules on this. In fact, the Supreme Court went so far as to compare a relevant precedent to that of a Jackson Pollock painting. What the Court will do is ask questions such as “Will this case control many other cases?”, or, “Does the federal government have an interest in litigating this case in a federal forum?”

Our team was successful in showing the Court that our claim was not going to have a substantial impact on the federal justice system or far reaching implications into federal law that may change the outcomes of future cases, but rather that our claim would have meaningful and substantial impact to the family members who were affected by the wrongful death of their loved one and the Court remanded to Georgia state court where this case belonged.

Despite the delay surrounding nomination of a new judge, we are optimistic that ultimately there will be a ruling in the other five cases consistent with Judge Wood’s order, and that all six cases will find their way back to the State Court of Chatham County for trial.

 Ken Shigley is a past president of the State Bar of Georgia, former chair of the board of the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia, lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice now in its eighth annual edition, a Certified Civil Trial Attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, past chair of the Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section of the American Association for Justice, past chair of the Georgia Insurance Law Institute, and a Diplomate of the National College of Advocacy. He has handled many catastrophic truck crash cases involving wrongful death, serious personal injury, neck and back injury, brain injury, spinal cord injury and burns. 

Truck crash on I-16 at I-95 on 5/19/2015 killed 5. Truck driver admitted falling asleep, is charged with 5 counts of vehicular homicide.

In the spring of 2015, there were two separate five-fatality truck crashes on I-16 in Georgia. The first one got most of the publicity because the victims were all beautiful young nursing students, but both were equally lethal and egregious. In both cases, there were at least indications that a truck driver fell asleep before running over a line of stopped traffic.

On April 22, 2015, in Bryan County, John Wayne Johnson, a truck driver from Louisiana driving for Total Trucking, a subsidiary of US Express, ran over vehicles stopped traffic. He killed five Georgia Southern University nursing students and injured two others. It appears he went to sleep as there was clear visibility on a long, straight stretch of road before he ran over the stopped vehicles. Johnson admitted he had been texting and exchanging sexually provocative message with a woman while driving but denied he was on the phone at the time of the crash.

Less than a month later, on May 19, 2015, on I-16  at its intersection with I-95, a line of traffic was stopped due to road work. David Gibbons of Pooler, driving from Georgia Freightways Corporation, while towing an intermodal container chassis trailer that carried a shipping container for CMA CMG (America), LLC, the US subsidiary of a French shipping line. The tractor-trailer was seen weaving for some distance prior to crashing into the line of stopped traffic, killing five people and injuring one. While the driver’s cell phone was allegedly destroyed in the resulting fire, phone bills indicated he was connected to the internet all day. He admitted to police on video at the scene, “I must have went to sleep.” The GBI crime lab found that he had a sleeping medication in his system, the most common trade name for which is Ambien. In deposition, he asserted his 5th Amendment right to remain silent on every question other than his name. (Disclosure: Our firm is involved as co-counsel in several of those cases.)

This spring, the Chatham County District Attorney charged Gibbons for five counts of vehicular homicide for the May 2015 crash.. This week, a Bryan County grand jury indicted Johnson for on nine counts based on the April 2015 crash, including five counts of first-degree vehicular homicide, serious injury by vehicle, reckless driving, following too closely, and failure to exercise due care. In an unusual move, the company that employed him was also indicted.

Several weeks ago, the civil cases arising from the Bryan County case were settled for substantial amounts. That was relatively simple as such things go since the trucking company and its parent company reportedly had $100 million in liability insurance coverage.

The Chatham County civil cases remain pending. It is more complex because a small trucking company with few assets had only had $1 million liability insurance coverage, so it is necessary to involve companies that are responsible for the flow of intermodal freight traffic into and through Georgia. Those cases remain actively in litigation with trial dates scheduled in 2017.

The conditions that led to both of these lethal crashes remain essentially unchanged. Truck traffic, largely to and from the Port of Savannah, may have had some cyclical waning but remains heavy. Tired and impaired truck drivers are still on the road. The Georgia Department of Transportation continues to repair sections of roadway, leading to lane closures and occasional traffic backups.

Moreover, trucking companies still resist use of forward collision avoidance technology and in-cab devices to monitor and alert drowsy drivers.  As Congress is concerned more about protecting trucking companies from implementation of more safety measures than with safety of the public on the roads, these tragedies will continue until being unsafe becomes more expensive than being safe.

Ken Shigley is a  double board certified trial lawyer in Atlanta, Georgia. He has served as president of the State Bar of Georgia, chair of the largest practice area section of the American Association for Justice (Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section), and chair of the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia board of trustees. He is a member of the Board of Governors of the Academy of Truck Accident Attorneys,lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation & Practice (2010-2016) and a chapter author of the 2016 edition of Handling Motor Vehicle Accident Cases, both published by Thomson Reuters.  He can be reached at ken.shigley@johnsonward.com.

Once again, a tractor trailer making a u-turn in dark or fog on a rural Georgia road has proven fatal. Once again, a turning tractor trailer forms a deadly and virtually invisible fence across a highway.

On September 30th at Lenox, Georgia, a man was killed when he collided with a Scruggs Concrete semi-truck attempting to make a u-turn in the roadway in foggy conditions. He was killed when the collision sheared off the top of his pickup truck.

This is an all too common form of truck crash across the United States, largely due to poor training and management at companies that operate the trucks.

A poorly trained, poorly manged and poorly supervised truck driver might not know better than to make a u-turn in the road at night or in the fog. But the intelligent, trained action is to avoid this. The fundamental duty of any driver is to exercise reasonable care. A lot of things can go into that. For a professional driver of tractor trailers, safety regulations, vehicle size, professional training and industry standards must be considered.

Because of its size — 80,000 pounds (or more for some types) and 48 to 60  feet in combined length — a tractor trailer cannot move quickly from a starting position.   A widely quoted estimate is that it takes 15-30 seconds for an 18-wheeler to execute a u-turn.  During that time, the trailer will have the highway blocked in both directions for roughly 12 seconds.  If the truck driver has difficulty executing the turn in the space available, the truck will block the road even longer.

An approaching motorist, especially at night or in fog, may not have time to perceive, react to, and avoid the tractor-trailer during the time that the highway is blocked. The result, as in this tragic incident, is often that the approaching motorist cannot stop in time to avoid going under the trailer that blocks the road.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations include rules on conspicuity (visibility) commercial motor vehicles such as tractor trailers. In general, trailers must meet the conspicuity standards found at FMVSS 108 (49 C.F.R. § 571.108). In a u-turn case, rules about visibility from the side are most significant. These vary slightly between federal and state rules for intrastate operations in some instances, but generally the rules require lights and reflective tape or sheeting to make the trucks visible to other motorists. The reflective material must have alternating red and white colors and be positioned horizontally, beginning and ending and the front and rear ends of the trailer.

Often in cases where a tractor trailer is attempting a u-turn in low light conditions, all an approaching driver sees is headlights in the opposite lane. By the time the driver perceives that a tractor trailer is straddling both sides of the highway, there is too little time to react and avoid a crash.

Conspicuity tape and reflectors are cheap. Going another half mile down the road to a place where a turn can be made safely off the highway is cheap. Lives are precious. Too often companies operating big trucks on the highway fail to weigh those values.

We often see tractor trailers that do not comply with conspicuity standards. In one recent case involving a log truck making a u-turn on a rural Georgia highway in the dark, side lights and reflectors were missing and what little reflective tape was on the trailer was worn and dirty. In sum, it had less than one-third of the conspicuity devices required by even the relatively slack rules governing log trucks in Georgia. With logs extending 20 feet off the rear of the trailer and lights not working properly, it formed a black fence across the highway in the dark.

Georgia Code Section 40-6-121 says, “No vehicle shall be turned so as to proceed in the opposite direction: (1) Upon any curve; (2) Upon the approach to or near the crest of a grade where such vehicle cannot be seen by the driver of another vehicle approaching from either direction; (3) Where such turn cannot be made in safety and without interfering with other traffic; or (4) Where a prohibition is posted.” Trucking industry standards go beyond that, taking into account vehicle size and visibility.

Drivers of tractor trailers are professionals who require special training and licensing. Operating vastly larger vehicles than a passenger car or pickup truck, their standard of reasonableness in driving takes into account the type of vehicle they are operating. The basics of that are outlined in the Commercial Drivers License (CDL) manual, which is essentially the same in all states.

Driver manuals from major trucking companies with good safety programs include industry standards higher than the minimum requirements of statutes. Some flatly state that truck driver should never make u-turns in roads under any circumstances. Some command that their drivers never make a left turn on a highway. They should go to the next place they can turn around off the road without blocking the road by making a u-turn.

The concrete industry has a wealth of driver training videos through the National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, covering most any situation that can arise in operation of those specialized vehicles. Every time I have handled a case involving a concrete truck, I have found that there were great training materials that if used would have educated the driver to avoid the hazard. And every time, I have found that the company did not bother to use those training materials. Once a concrete driver, upon seeing the training video for the first time in his deposition, exclaimed, “them [expletive deleted] never showed me that; if I had known, this wouldn’t have happened!”

Root cause analysis of these totally preventable and unnecessary crashes usually goes back to corporate management, training and supervision.  If a driver was lost, it is likely because dispatch failed to provide good directions and GPS systems. If the driver was tired, we need to consider whether the company adequately monitored fatigue and hours of service compliance, including the auditing driver logs against available documents to catch log falsification.

The bottom line is that an 18-wheeler driver simply cannot safely make a u-turn on a public road, especially in conditions of reduced visibility. Every time a tractor-trailer driver makes a u-turn in a highway, he creates a clear and present risk of injury or death just to save the time it would take  to go a little way down the road to a place he
could safely change directions. Every company that fails to train its drivers to avoid u-turns has an unspoken policy of endangering the public.

——————

Ken Shigley is a trial attorney practicing statewide in Georgia, focused on serious personal injury and wrongful death cases, especially arising from commercial truck accidents. He is currently chair of the American Association for Justice Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section. Previously he served as president of the State Bar of Georgia and chair of the board of trustees of theInstitute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia. He is lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice and a board certified civil trial attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy.  Ken Shigley is a candidate for election to the Georgia Court of Appeals in 2018.

NOTE TO TRUCK DRIVERS:
Our law practice focuses on representation of people who are seriously injured, and families of those killed, in crashes with large commercial vehicles. While those are often truck drivers, we do not handle truckers’ employment law matters. For legal advice on issues with your employer or truck driving schools, see Truckers Justice Center. 

One day in Kansas City, I took the deposition testimony through an interpreter of a Bosnian immigrant truck driver. He was driving with a Florida Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) when he crashed an 18-wheeler into my client on a Georgia interstate highway.

I asked where he got his truck driver training. He said some Russian guy in North Carolina, whose name he could not recall, trained him. How did he study the Commercial Drivers License manual, published in English?   He said his 10-year-old daughter read it and translated it for him. She may have been a precocious child, but really? I didn’t think then to dig into how he was able to take and pass the Florida CDL tests.

For several years, a high percentage of our serious truck crash cases have involved immigrant truck drivers who have to testify through interpreters. They drive the highways of America in little bubbles of their home countries, talking by cell phone as they drive with people in their home countries, listening to music in a native dialect, and never really interacting with America language or culture.

When I look back over the past several years, all the truck drivers with inadequate English whom I have encountered in truck crash cases had obtained their CDL’s in either Florida or New Jersey. Perhaps that is just a coincidence. Perhaps.

I deeply respect the immigrant work ethic that leads many newcomers to this country to work hard in jobs that it is hard to find enough Americans to do. Occasionally I have represented hard-working immigrant truckers, visited in their homes and met their wives and children.  But language proficiency has real implications for safety. That is why interstate commercial truck drivers are required to be able to read and speak English well enough to read signs, make entries on records and interact with the public and police. (49 C.F.R Section 391.11)

Now FBI and Florida law enforcement officials have charged four people, including three Russian immigrants, with operating a fraudulent business to provide CDL’s to unqualified immigrants.

Ellariy Medvednik,, Natalia Dontsova, Adrian Salari, and Clarence Davis  have all been indicted for conspiracy to aid and abet the unlawful production of Florida driver licenses and commercial driver licenses. According to the indictment, they were associated with Larex, Inc., a commercial truck driving school that marketed itself online to Russian speakers.

Russian speaking people from elsewhere seeking Florida CDLs would contact Medvednik to arrange for Larex’s services at a price of $2,000 to $5,000. It only took a few days to get a license through the school. A typical truck-driving school lasts three or four weeks and costs at least $6,000.

Many of the CDL applicants were Russian-speaking immigrants living in New York, Illinois, California and Virginia. These  would travel to Florida to obtain their CDLs with the intention of returning to those states immediately afterward.

However, to obtain a Florida CDL, an individual must first possess a Florida driver license. Florida restricts its driver licenses and CDLs to Florida residents. The Russian defendants would provide false documentation that the applicants resided with them in Florida, so that the applicants could obtain Florida driver licenses.

They would then proceed to fraudulently obtain a Florida CDL.  Dontsova, using covert communication equipment, provided answers to the students during the written portion of the CDL exam, leading to issuance of a CDL permit.

Second, Larex hired Davis, a third-party tester authorized by the State of Florida, to administer vehicle inspection tests, basic control skills tests, and road tests. According to the US Attorney, Davis routinely passed and certified students who should have failed based on their test performance. Based on Davis’s certifications, these Russian applicants were able to obtain Florida CDLs. At least 600 people have been identified as utilizing Larex’s services with Davis as the third-party tester to obtain a CDL.

The FBI started investigating the school in June 2013 after the Orange County Tax Collector’s Office noticed that many people had applied for a CDL using the same home address. This led to a sting investigation in which a Russian-speaking informant posed as an applicant and went through the whole process, and ultimately a federal search warrant for the records at Larex.

The implication for public safety across the United States is that hundreds of unqualified truck drivers, who are not sufficiently proficient in English to qualify for a CDL, and who could not pass either the written or the road tests, were authorized to drive 80,000 tractor trailers on every highway in the United States. Most probably were hired for small, fly-by-night trucking companies that to turn a blind eye to  driver qualifications and compliance with safety rules.

I hope they do not run into my future clients on the road.

—————-

Ken Shigley is an Atlanta trial attorney focused on serious personal injury and wrongful death cases. He is currently chair of the American Association for Justice Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section. Previously he served as president of the State Bar of Georgia and chair of the board of trustees of the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia. He is lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice and a board certified civil trial attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy. Ken Shigley is a candidate for election to the Georgia Court of Appeals in 2018.

The families of the Georgia Southern nursing students killed or injured this week when a tractor trailer ran over them on I-16 bear a huge burden of pain and grief. As a parent, I cannot imagine anything worse than the sudden death of a child who has had you wrapped around her finger from the first time you held her in your arms.

The families need time, space, privacy and gracious consideration from others to have space to grieve, each in their own way.

After any such tragedy waves of welcome and unwelcome people descend upon the survivors.

First may come the well-meaning relatives, friends, neighbors and pastors. I can imagine that each family’s home has been deluged with casseroles and that parents’ Sunday School classes have signed up to provide meals for the next month. That loving embrace can help one keep going through the early days.

But then, after the funeral, folks go back to their everyday lives, leaving parents and siblings to sit in the departed child’s bedroom and weep for hours in the dark. Each must process the stages of grief.

Soon come the claims adjusters, feigning sympathy, lulling the parents into complacency, and giving the impression that they will do everything they can to make things right. They are well trained to insinuate themselves into the confidence of grieving families for the calculated purpose of minimizing the cost for the trucking company and its insurers. Think of wolves in sheep’s’ clothing. No matter what they say, they are not on the side of the victims. They are there with one purpose, to save the company as much money as humanly possible.

And then, unfortunately, are the members of my profession who ignore ethics rules against solicitation. These are the proverbial “ambulance chasers” who descend upon the families, either in person or through agents often called “runners” or “cappers.” Defying both State Bar of Georgia ethics rules and Georgia criminal law, they solicit cases from grief-stricken families.
Over the years, clients and others have told me stories of being approached even in hospitals and funeral homes, in the first hours or day after a tragedy, by people who represent themselves as “counselors,” “investigators,” “spiritual advisers” and even clergy, who slip into conversation a question about whether they have a lawyer yet.

One client whose wife was killed when their car was run over by a tractor trailer on an interstate highway, and whose son called me to meet with him at home the week after the funeral, showed me a thick package he had received by Fedex from a law firm in Washington, DC, that apparently solicits victims of major catastrophes all over the country.

Georgia Rule of Professional Conduct 7.3 provides:

A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment as a private practitioner for the lawyer, a partner or associate through direct personal contact or through live telephone contact, with a non-lawyer who has not sought advice regarding employment of a lawyer.”

It also provides:

A lawyer shall not send, or knowingly permit to be sent, on behalf of the lawyer, the lawyer’s firm, lawyer’s partner, associate, or any other lawyer affiliated with the lawyer or the lawyer’s firm, a written communication to a prospective client for the purpose of obtaining professional employment if:
. . . . the written communication concerns an action for personal injury or wrongful death or otherwise relates to an accident or disaster involving the person to whom the communication is addressed or a relative of that person, unless the accident or disaster occurred more than 30 days prior to the mailing of the communication; or the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the physical, emotional or mental state of the person is such that the person could not exercise reasonable judgment in employing a lawyer.

This Bar ethics rule further provides that a lawyer shall not compensate anyone for recommending the lawyer’s employment except under a bona fide lawyer referral service approved by the Bar. Thus, paying someone else to solicit cases is a disbarment offense.

While the maximum penalty for a violation of Rule 7.3 is disbarment, it is difficult for the Bar’s general counsel to prosecute those cases because there are seldom people motivated to both file grievances and show up to testify. Even out of state lawyers are theoretically subject to reciprocal discipline in their home state for violation of these rules in Georgia if the Bar has solid evidence upon which to prosecute the case.

Respectable plaintiffs’ personal injury lawyers across the country have almost universally condemned this insidious practice of solicitation of cases through runners. In some states there have been damage suits against lawyers who use “runners” on the basis of violation of Fair Business Practice statutes. In Florida, the Attorney General issued a statewide grand jury report on the fraudulent practices involved with solicitation of injury victims by “runners.” Texas recently passed a law attacking this practice as “barratry.” Another approach could be to make any fee contract obtained through use of runners voidable at any time in order to reduce the financial incentive, but that could be subject to abuse by clients falsely claiming at the time of settlement that a runner was involved in order to extort an innocent lawyer in to giving up an honestly earned fee.

Bottom-feeding, ambulance-chasing lawyers who are not concerned about their professional reputation have felt free to violate this rule. Because people who are solicited either hang up immediately, or are too unsophisticated and naïve to recognize a problem, there has been hardly any way to prosecute the cases. It is very difficult to do that without a sting investigation, which the Bar’s general counsel has not felt equipped to do. The main “runner” case for which there has been bar discipline in recent years came about only when federal agents executed a search warrant at a law office, found the “runner book” and turned it over to the State Bar.

One of my great frustrations as State Bar president in 2011-12 was the difficulty of aggressively prosecuting such violations. Lacking law enforcement resources, the General Counsel’s office was extremely reluctant to organize the kind of sting investigation I knew, as a former prosecutor, could be effective. I appointed a committee to organize training for State Court solicitors, law enforcement and hospital attorneys on how to carry out these investigation. That committee included former FBI agents, State Court solicitors and hospital counsel. While we passed a tweak of lawyer advertising rules, which the Supreme Court later approved, we were unable to get overburdened law enforcement agencies or prosecutors interested in making “runner” cases.

The State Bar needs to enforce the ethical rules and uphold virtue in the legal profession, but it cannot make strong disciplinary cases against such unethical lawyers without evidence required to support a prosecution. Anyone who receives such a solicitation should get the name and number of the caller and then immediately call the State Bar of Georgia Office of General Counsel at (404) 527-8720, and offer to assist in investigation and file a grievance for violation of Rule 7.3.

Sting investigations could be undertaken by law enforcement, but they are reluctant to commit resources for such investigations when the criminal offense is only a misdemeanor. Thus, I eventually came to the conclusion that the only way to get meaningful enforcement is to make it a felony.

In 2014, the Georgia legislature passed Georgia Code Section 33-24-53 to read to somewhat strengthen the law against injury case solicitation as follows:

(a) As used in this Code section, the term:
(1) ‘Capper,’ ‘runner,’ or ‘steerer’ means a person who receives a pecuniary benefit from a practitioner or health care service provider, whether directly or indirectly, to solicit, procure, or attempt to procure a client, patient, or customer at the direction or request of, or in cooperation with, a practitioner or health care service provider whose purpose is to obtain benefits under a contract of insurance or to assert a claim against an insured or an insurer for providing services to the client, patient, or customer. Capper, runner, or steerer shall not include:
(A) Any insurance company or agent or employee thereof who provides referrals or recommendations to its insureds; or (B) A practitioner or health care service provider who procures clients, patients, or customers through the use of public media or by referrals or recommendations from other practitioners or health care service providers.
(2) ‘Practitioner’ means an attorney, health care professional, owner or partial owner of a health care practice or facility, or any person employed or acting on behalf of any of the individuals in this paragraph.
(3) ‘Public media’ means telephone directories, professional directories, newspapers and other periodicals, radio and television, billboards, and mailed or electronically transmitted written communications that do not involve in-person contact with a specific prospective client, patient, or customer.
(b) Except as provided for in paragraph (5) of subsection (a) of Code Section 50-18-72, it is unlawful for any person in an individual capacity or in a capacity as a law enforcement officer, law enforcement records staff member, wrecker services staff member, emergency staff member, physician, hospital employee, or attorney to solicit, release, or sell any information relating to the parties of a motor vehicle collision for personal financial gain. This subsection shall not apply to mass public media advertisement and solicitation.
(c) It is unlawful for:
(1) Any person in an individual capacity or in a capacity as a public or private employee or any firm, corporation, partnership, or association to act as a capper, runner, or steerer for any practitioner or health care service provider. This paragraph shall not prohibit an attorney or health care provider from making a referral and receiving compensation as is permitted under applicable professional rules of conduct; and (2) Any practitioner or health care service provider to compensate or give anything of value to a person acting as a capper, runner, or steerer. It is also unlawful for any capper, runner, or steerer to recommend or secure a practitioner’s or health care service provider’s employment by a client, patient, or customer if such practitioner or health care service provider obtains or intends to obtain benefits under a contract of insurance or asserts a claim against an insured or an insurer for providing services to the client, patient, or customer.
(d) Any natural person convicted of a violation of this Code section shall, on the first offense, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than 30 days and a fine not to exceed $1,000.00. Any natural person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this Code section shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment of not more than ten years and by a fine of not more than $100,000.00 per violation.”

The weakness of this law is that law enforcement agencies are seldom motivated to initiate effective investigations for a misdemeanor first offense, so there is unlikely to ever be a felony second offense to prosecute.

I hope that the families affected by this tragedy will reject those who solicit them in violation of the State Bar and Georgia criminal law prohibitions, do their own due diligence research, and select qualified lawyers to seek justice.

——————————–

Ken Shigley is past president of the State Bar of Georgia, a certified civil trial attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice (Thomson Reuters West, 2010-15), and chair-elect of the Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section of the American Association for Justice. His practice is focused primarily on commercial trucking liability cases. The firm also includes, in an “of counsel” capacity, David Nissenberg, author of The Law of Commercial Trucking: Damages to Persons and Property, a two-volume text on commercial trucking law which is supplemented annually.

Georgians are shocked and saddened today by a truck crash on I-16 in Bryan County that snuffed out the promising young lives of five nursing students at Georgia Southern University.

The grief is personal for a 2013 Georgia Southern graduate in our office who was a close friend of two of the five girls who were killed. For me as the father of two young adults, I shudder to comprehend their parents’ loss. One friend on the coast described the whole event as “surreal.”

The crash happened about 5:45 AM in predawn darkness on Wednesday. The five nursing students were in a sedan and SUV headed east on I-16, going to their last day of clinical training for the semester at St. Joseph’s/Candler Hospital in Savannah. Traffic had slowed due to another accident ahead.

A tractor trailer failed to stop and crashed into the stopped traffic, causing a seven vehicle pileup. The Georgia Southern students were in an SUV and a passenger car, both of which were impacted. The passenger car burst into flames.

The tractor trailer was operated by Total Transportation of Mississippi, LLC, based in Richland, MS, a suburb of Jackson. A subsidiary of US Xpress which is based in Chattanooga, Total has unsafe operation score worse than 90% of all motor carriers in the US. On the Federal Motor Carrier Administration website, it lists 748 trucks and 938 drivers, registered to haul general freight in 48 states.

The cause of the truck driver’s inattention is unknown at this time. At that time of morning, fatigue is a likely suspect if he had driven through the night. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations limit interstate truck drivers to driving 11 hours out of a 14 hour shift before a 10 hour break. Even if there is not an hours of service violation, a driver can be impaired by fatigue due to other factors including disruption of circadian rhythms.

Another common possibility is cell phone distraction. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations prohibit use of handheld cell phones during operation of a commercial motor vehicle on the highway. However, at that early hour cell phone distraction may be somewhat less likely. In any event, I hope the SCRT team obtained a search warrant for the data recorded on the phone’s SIM card.

I am 99.9% certain that the trucking company had a rapid response team, under the direction of a trucking defense lawyer, at the scene about as soon as ambulances arrived. Before the families of these students learned of their tragic loss, the company probably had at least one retired law enforcement investigator and a defense lawyer there to observe and, if possible, influence the investigation. We have handled cases in which crucial evidence was lost from a crash scene while the state troopers were dealing with hurt people and traffic but the company’s rapid response team was concerned only with minimizing the company’s legal problems.

The promising nursing students whose lives were tragically taken in this crash were:

• Emily Clark, 20, Powder Springs • Morgan Bass, 20, Leesburg • Abbie Deloach, 21, Savannah • Catherine (McKay) Pittman, 21, Alpharetta • Caitlyn Baggett, 21, Millen
For a parent, it is hard to imagine anything worse than the sudden death of a child. Contrary to the normal order of nature, it is like having a hole punched in the heart.

Two other nursing students, Megan Richards of Loganville and Brittney McDaniel of Reidsville, were injured and transported to a Savannah hospital for treatment. By Thursday afternoon, Richards had been treated and released. No information has been made public on McDaniel’s condition.

The crash scene as portrayed in news reports was strikingly similar to a case we are preparing for trial in the fall in Brunswick. In that incident on I-95, a truck driver was on his cell phone more than 20 minutes up to the time of the crash, talking with someone in Colombia, South America, and did not notice any of the vehicles stopped in the road ahead of him.

In this case, my educated guess is that it will take several months for the Georgia State Patrol Specialized Collision Reconstruction Team (SCRT) to complete all details of investigation and reconstruction. Unless alcohol or drugs turn up in the truck driver’s blood test, I expect these deaths will be prosecuted as five counts of misdemeanor homicide by vehicle, plus whatever other traffic charges may be included, in the State Court of Bryan County at Pembroke. Each misdemeanor count is punishable by up to 12 months incarceration. In that court, Ray Smith is the Solicitor General and Jack Carney is the Judge.

The prosecutor can withhold access to the SCRT investigative report while criminal charges remain pending. Most seasoned prosecutors, however, are willing to share that file with attorneys for victims.

Civil cases arising from this crash are likely to end up in federal court due to diversity of citizenship between plaintiffs (mostly Georgia) and defendants (company in Mississippi, driver unknown). One option would be the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia in Savannah. Because a couple of the young women were from metro Atlanta, another possibility would be the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta. If a Georgia resident could be found to credibly share fault, the civil cases could be filed in the county where that Georgia resident resides, avoiding the red tape of federal court.

Ken Shigley is past president of the State Bar of Georgia, a certified civil trial attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice (Thomson Reuters West, 2010-15), and chair-elect of the Motor Vehicle Collision, Highway & Premises Liability Section of the American Association for Justice. His practice is focused primarily on commercial trucking liability cases.

Reports have surfaced that the deceased was driving a Nissan Pathfinder on I-85 in Gwinnett County when a tractor trailer switched lanes and forced the vehicle into another lane which was occupied by a box truck. After the vehicle hit the box truck, it left the road at high speeds crashing into a steep hill between I-85 and the interstate ramp at Steve Reynolds Boulevard.

Gwinnett police spokesman Cpl. Jake Smith said the vehicle flipped several times which caused the woman to be ejected from the front passenger seat. The children and the man in the vehicle were taken to Children’s at Egleston Hospital where Cpl. Smith said they are likely to survive. Smith reports that the box truck stopped at the scene and was cooperative with investigators. However, the tractor trailer failed to stop and was later found in Cobb County, according to investigators.

“The truck driver was questioned,” Gwinnett County police spokesman Cpl. Edwin Ritter said. “Investigators are following up on all leads.”

When fatal crashes such as this one occur, the Georgia State Patrol Specialized Collision Reconstruction Team (SCRT) is called to the scene. The mission of this specialized team is to provide a means by which fatal crashes can be investigated by specially trained investigators. The SCRT works to collect and document all evidence so their can be a successful court hearing. The SCRT is also responsible to gathering information that could help avoid future collisions. There are five teams of investigators throughout the state to assist officers with deadly crashes. These officers are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week and help with cases ranging from fatal crashes to officer involved shootings.

It is still speculative to guess the cause of the crash, but a few of the many Federal Motor Carrier Regulations that could be implicated in this case include:
– Improper lane change in violation of Georgia traffic law: This would become a violation if investigators find the truck failed to use a signal, failed to be within a reasonably safe passing distance, or failed to signal a stop or sudden decrease in speed.
– Possible hours of service: This would become a violation if the investigation reveals the truck driver was a long haul driver in interstate commerce and had not complied with the rule requiring a 10 hour rest break after operating no more than 11 hours in a 14 hour work day.
– Possible use of a hand held cell phone or other driver distraction: A new FMCSA rule restricts the use of all hand-held mobile devices by drivers of commercial vehicles. Unless the call can be made with a single button, hands-free phone in close proximity. It would be considered a violation if the driver is also reaching for a mobile device in a way that requires the driver to move out of the driving position.

– Truck driver impairment due to fatigue, medication, illness, etc.

Continue reading “Hit and Run by Tractor Trailer Kills Woman in Gwinnett” >>

Kenneth L. Shigley Past President, State Bar of Georgia (2011-12)
Board Certified Civil Trial Advocate & Civil Pretrial Advocate,
National Board of Legal Specialty Certification Attorney Referrals:
https://www.atlantainjurylawyer.com/attorney-lawyer-1008566.html

Shigley Law, LLC One Midtown Plaza 1360 Peachtree Street, Suite 910 Atlanta , Georgia 30309 Phone: 404.253.7862 Fax: 678.791.1728 Email: ken.shigley@johnsonward.com

One advantage of this “direct action” statute is that the injury victim or decedent’s survivors would not have to chase down a trucker who might be elusive. Another is that it removes any doubt from jurors’ minds as to whether the defendant has insurance, though the amount of coverage is not revealed.

For year there has been doubt about how this applied to interstate trucking cases. If the trucking company was just operating within Georgia, and the insurance company was authorized to do business in Georgia, the direct action law clearly applied. If the trucking company was from another state, we operated in a gray area in deciding whether or not to include the insurer in a suit. Trucking companies and their insurers generally contended that the Georgia Direct Action Statute prevented plaintiffs from joining insurers of motor carriers that do not engage in intrastate commerce in Georgia. In representing plaintiffs, we often searched for aspects of intrastate trucking in the business of even an out-of-state trucking company.

Several months ago in a case in which I was involved, Judge Thomas Thrash of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled that the “direct action” statute also applies to interstate trucking cases in Georgia.

In Bramlett v. Bajric, 2012 WL 4951213 (N.D.Ga.,2012), Judge Thrash ruled that:

[I]nsurers of interstate carriers can be joined as parties under the statute. First, the statutory language itself indicates that the joinder provisions apply to both intrastate and interstate carriers. O.C.G.A. § 40–2–140(c)(4) states that “[a]ny person having a cause of action, whether arising in tort or contract, under this Code section may join in the same cause of action the motor carrier and its insurance carrier.” (Emphasis supplied). The phrase “Code section,” as used throughout the Georgia Code, refers to the entire section 40–2–140.FN1 The proper title for the section is Title 40, Chapter 2, Article 6A, Section 40–2–140. See O.C.G.A. § 40–2–140 (emphasis supplied). In the absence of any constraining language, there is no reason to think that the § 40–2–140(c)(4)’s reference to “this Code section” refers to anything but the entire code section, 40–2–140. Therefore, the plain language of the statute indicates that injured parties are able to join the insurers of interstate motor carriers.

This is significant in the handling of serious injury and wrongful death cases arising in Georgia against interstate trucking companies.

Along with the ability to seek an award of contingent attorney fees for violation of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which may be considered as evidence of bad faith in the transaction under O.C.G.A. § 13-6-11, this helps make Georgia courts a viable option when there is a question where to file suit for a catastrophic trucking case.

Ken Shigley is past president of the State Bar of Georgia and former chair of the trustees of the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia. He is one of 18 Georgia lawyers with double board certification in Civil Trial Advocacy and Civil Pretrial Advocacy from the National Board of Legal Specialty Certification, and lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation & Practice. Based in Atlanta, his law practice mostly based on referrals from other attorneys in plaintiffs’ personal injury and wrongful death cases arising from motor carrier accidents.

But it is important to know that the trucking company and its insurance company get a rapid response team to the crash scene before the vehicles are moved. While the victims are in an ambulance or in the emergency room, the trucking company has its investigators massaging evidence and trying to influence the police report.

Some electronic data from tractor trailers may be lost or destroyed within a few days if there is not quick action to assure that it is preserved. Every minute of delay leads to loss of crucial evidence.

Therefore, it is vitally important for the victim’s family to move quickly after a catastrophic truck crash to hire a lawyer who specializes in trucking cases and who can deploy his or her own rapid response team. While responses may be scaled to the seriousness of the case, the ultimate rapid response may include:

• a highly qualified accident reconstruction expert with solid experience in reconstructing crashes involving large commercial vehicles, not just car wreck.

• a trucking safety expert qualified to assess violations of trucking safety rules;

• a conspicuity expert qualified to assess visibility of vehicles in the conditions existing at the time of the crash;

• a forensic evidence photographer qualified to preserve the actual appearance of the vehicles and conditions under existing lighting conditions;

• a human factors expert who can assess perception and reaction under the conditions on
the roadway;

• a forensic computer expert qualified to obtain and interpret the wide array of event data recorders and computers on large commercial trucks.

In a catastrophic truck wreck it is a mistake to rely solely upon the police report, even when reasonably well qualified police accident reconstructionist are involved.

Ken Shigley is immediate past president of the State Bar of Georgia, chair of the board of the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia and incoming secretary of the American Association for Justice Motor Vehicle, Highway and Premises Liability Section. He is a board member of the American Association for Justice Trucking Litigation Group and has been on the faculty of trucking litigation seminars from coast to coast. Mr. Shigley is double board certified in Civil Trial Advocacy and Civil Pretrial Advocacy by the American Board of Legal Specialty Certification (formerly National Board of Trial Advocacy), has an AV Preeminent rating in Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, is listed as a “Super Lawyer” by Atlanta Magazine and “Legal Elite” by Georgia Trend, and is the lead author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation & Practice (West, 2010-12).

Investigation in trucking crashes often extends beyond what happened immediately on the roadway. We often find that a pattern of disregard for safety in the management of the trucking company is an underlying factor. It may involve negligence in hiring, training and supervision of truck drivers, failure to adequately monitor compliance with hours of service rules, and failure to monitor driver speed and operations.

In Georgia, we represent families and individuals in serious neck and back injury, burn injury, brain injury, amputation injury, spinal cord injury, fracture injury and wrongful death cases arising from tractor trailer and big rig crashes.

Ken Shigley is president of the State Bar of Georgia until he leaves office on June 2, 2012.

Lithonia truck driver Stephen Scott has been charged with second degree vehicular homicide and following too closely in the Friday crash that killed a Lawrenceville couple, Donna and John Kesse, on I-985 in Gwinnett County, according to media reports.

Traffic was slowed in the interstate’s southbound right-hand lane due to merging traffic from Ga. 20 about 3:20 p.m. Friday when a box truck driven by Scott slammed into the Keese vehicle, then careening into a Dodge Ram pickup truck and a Saturn minivan towing a small trailer with an ATV on it.

Ken Shigley is an Atlanta trial attorney focused on catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases arising from commercial trucking collisions. He is nearing the end of his term as president of the State Bar of Georgia.

NHTSA said in its annual report that 3,675 people died in trucking related accidents in 2010, an increase of 295 over the 3,380 fatalities in 2009. The number injured in trucking accidents increased 12% from 17,000 to 19,000. (Those number are surely rounded off.)

NHTSA did not clearly identify a cause, but increased truck traffic due to gradual economic recovery is likely a major factor.

Ken Shigley is an Atlanta based trucking trial attorney who currently serves as president of the State Bar of Georgia.

I don’t know if that is what led to a fatal crash this week just across the state line on I-85 in Anderson County, SC. However, authorities in Anderson County have already concluded that a truck driver fell asleep at the wheel causing a wreck that killed three people. According to the coroner, an autopsy ruled out a stroke or heart problem.

South Carolina state troopers report that a big rig driven by Eddie Wyatt, 69,of Rockmart, Ga., was southbound on I-85, when it careened across the median into the northbound lanes, crashing head on into another tractor trailer head on. The second 18 wheeler jack-knifed and struck an SUV and a pick-up truck.

Both tractor trailer drivers, Wyatt and , Clay Johnson, 38 of Charlotte, N.C., were killed.

The third fatality was Jeremy Wilson, 33, a lawyer in Lincolnton, N.C., who was driving a Toyota Tundra towing a fishing boat on a trailer.

Curtis and Beverly Schulze, were airlifted to Greenville Memorial Hospital. They were released on Sunday.

Ken Shigley is an Atlanta-based trucking accident trial attorney, handling interstate trucking accident cases throughout the southeast under the multijurisdictional practice and pro hac vice rules of each state. A graduate of Furman University in Greenville, SC, and Emory University Law School in Atlanta, Shigley is a board certified civil trial lawyer of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, a national board member of the Commercial Trucking Litigation Group of the American Association for Justice, and president of the State Bar of Georgia.

According to a report from the North Carolina Highway Patrol, 50-year-old tractor trailer driver Ronald Eugene Graybeal of Newport, Tennessee was charged with felony death by vehicle, driving while impaired and possessing drugs including marijuana and methadone. According to media reports, he was convicted of rape in Cocke County, Tenn., in 1981 and is listed on the national sex offender’s registry.

Graybeal was driving for Hawley Transport Services of Newport, TN, a company with ten trucks and ten drivers. That company’s records with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration indicate a score of 82.4% on “fatigued driving – hours of service” in on-road inspections in the past two years. Out of 73 relevant Inspections, 21 of those discovered a total of 29 fatigued driving violations.

Hawley Transport also has multiple prior reports of unsafe driving and vehicle maintenance violations.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations have zero tolerance for use of drugs that can impair drivers. Trucking companies are required to have random drug tests of drivers. However, when we sue trucking companies after catastrophic crashes, we often find companies that have continued operation after being cited dozens of times for failure to comply with drug testing rules, as well as hours of service and vehicle maintenance violations. This often appears to be part of a slack corporate culture that disregards safety rules.

Ken Shigley is president of the State Bar of Georgia, author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation and Practice, a Certified Civil Trial Attorney of the National Board of Trial Advocacy (one of 20 in Georgia), a board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group, and designated as a “Super Lawyer” by Atlanta Magazine. His practice involves litigation of interstate motor carrier collision cases in Georgia and neighboring states in compliance with the multijurisdictional practice and pro hac vice rules of each state.

One of the basic rules for operation of a large commercial truck is to exercise “extreme caution” when bad weather affects visibility or traction.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations §392.14 provides:

Extreme caution in the operation of a commercial motor vehicle shall be exercised when hazardous conditions, such as those caused by snow, ice, sleet, fog, mist, rain, dust, or smoke, adversely affect visibility or traction. Speed shall be reduced when such conditions exist. If conditions become sufficiently dangerous, the operation of the commercial motor vehicle shall be discontinued and shall not be resumed until the commercial motor vehicle can be safely operated. . . .

The Commercial Drivers License Manual says:

It will take longer to stop, and it will be harder to turn without skidding, when the road is slippery. Wet roads can double stopping distance. You must drive slower to be able to stop in the same distance as on a dry road. Reduce speed by about one-third (e.g., slow from 55 to about 35 mph) on a wet road.

Just an educated guess here, but I would bet that at least one of the truck drivers involved in those wrecks on Monday didn’t exercise extreme caution and slow down by one-third.

Ken Shigley, author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation & Practice, is a board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group, a Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers . He practices law at the Atlanta law firm of Chambers, Aholt & Rickard, and has broad experience in catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, products liability, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases. He is also president-elect of the State Bar of Georgia. This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.

Rosario Velez, 44, was in her minivan stopped in the I-285 emergency lane at Riverside Drive, making a phone call, when she was struck by an tractor trailer that, according to the police report, crossed over into the emergency lane to hit her.

Today, Sandy Springs police arrested Joseph Leon Golden, 43, the truck driver from El Paso, Texas. He has been charged with second-degree vehicular homicide and a lane violation, and is being held at the Fulton County Jail on $5,500 bond.

Ken Shigley, author of Georgia Law of Torts: Trial Preparation & Practice , is president-elect of the State Bar of Georgia. A Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers . He practices law at the Atlanta law firm of Chambers, Aholt & Rickard, and has broad experience in catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, products liability, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases. This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.

But a recent tragedy in West Virginia demonstrates why there is no tolerance for truck drivers operating an 80,000 pound, 18-wheeler semi tractor trailer truck when impaired by alcohol or drugs. Police there say Breazeale Norris was driving drunk when he hit a car on I-64 in December 2009. One 18-year-old boy died in the crash and three others were injured. Norris was charged with DUI causing death and leaving the scene of an accident.

About 37% of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations deals with alcohol and drug testing procedures.

49 C.F.R. § 392.5 absolutely prohibits use or possession of alcohol in operation of a commercial motor vehicle. “No driver shall . . . [u]se alcohol, . . . or be under the influence of alcohol, within 4 hours before going on duty or operating, or having physical control of, a commercial motor vehicle; or . . . [u]se alcohol, be under the influence of alcohol, or have any measured alcohol concentration or detected presence of alcohol, while on duty, or operating, or in physical control of a commercial motor vehicle.” Any driver is violation of this is placed in “out of service status” for 24 hours.

It further provides that “No motor carrier shall require or permit a driver to . . . [v]iolate any provision [of this section or] [b]e on duty or operate a commercial motor vehicle if, by the driver’s general appearance or conduct or by other substantiating evidence, the driver appears to have used alcohol within the preceding 4 hours.”

49 C.F.R. § 391.15 provides that a driver is disqualified by driving a commercial vehicle with blood alcohol 0.04% or more, or under influence of drugs, or refusing to take drug or alcohol test.

Ken Shigley is a truck and bus safety trial attorney representing seriously injured people and families of people killed in tractor trailer, big rig, semi, intermodal container freight, log truck, cement truck, dump truck, log truck and bus accidents statewide in Georgia.

Mr. Shigley has extensive experience representing parties in interstate trucking collision cases, and in the past two years has spoken at national interstate trucking litigation seminars in Chicago (trucking insurance), New Orleans (trial tactics and side underride issues), St. Louis (punitive damages), San Francisco (dealing with insolvent trucking companies), Atlanta (trucking insurance, closing argument), Nashville (use of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations), and Amelia Island (overview of trucking litigation).

Mr. Shigley served as chair of the Southeastern Motor Carrier Litigation Institute and is a national board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group. He is currently Treasurer of the 41,000 member State Bar of Georgia, of which he will become President-Elect on 6/19/10 and President in on 6/4/11. This blog expresses only personal views of Mr. Shigley, and nothing in it should be construed as expressing any opinion on behalf of any organization of which Mr. Shigley is a member or officer.

A Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers (Martindale). In addition to trucking litigation, he has broad experience in products liability, catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases.

This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.

The tractor trailer driver did not stop, but a witness took down information about the truck and the SC Highway Patrol was able to locate the driver. At last report, SC officials had not released information about the accident reconstruction investigation or what charges the tractor trailer driver might face.

Ken Shigley is a trucking safety trial attorney who has extensive experience representing parties in interstate trucking collision cases. He served as chair of the Southeastern Motor Carrier Litigation Institute in 2005, is a national board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group of the American Association for Justice, and is on the National Advisory Board for the Association of Interstate Trucking Lawyers of America. A Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers (Martindale). In addition to trucking litigation, he has broad experience in products liability, catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases. Mr Shigley is currently Treasurer of the 41,000 member State Bar of Georgia, of which he will become President-Elect on 6/19/10 and President in on 6/4/11.

This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.

The National Transportation Safety Board is still investigating why the tractor trailer crossed the median and collided with the van. However, one thing that has to come to light is that the trucking company had an unsatisfactory safety rating with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Hester, Inc., of Fayette, Alabama, had a Safestat rating of 88.4 based on failed safety inspections. Any Safestat score above 75 is considered unsatisfactory. An official of the American Trucking Association stated to the Washington Post that Hester should not have been operating, based on that Safestat score.

There is no report yet as to specific violations of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations related to this crash. But in my experience companies with Safestat ratings that bad have a terrible safety culture and we find multiple violations of safety rules when a crash occurs.

Ken Shigley is a trucking safety trial attorney representing seriously injured people and families of people killed in tractor trailer, big rig, semi, intermodal container freight, log truck, cement truck, dump truck, log truck and bus accidents statewide in Georgia.

Mr. Shigley has extensive experience representing parties in interstate trucking collision cases, and in the past two years has spoken at national interstate trucking litigation seminars in Chicago (trucking insurance), New Orleans (trial tactics and side underride issues), St. Louis (punitive damages), San Francisco (dealing with insolvent trucking companies), Atlanta (trucking insurance, closing argument), Nashville (use of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations), and Amelia Island (overview of trucking litigation).

He served as chair of the Southeastern Motor Carrier Litigation Institute in 2005, is a national board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group of the American Association for Justice, and is on the National Advisory Board for the Association of Interstate Trucking Lawyers of America.

A Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers (Martindale). In addition to trucking litigation, he has broad experience in products liability, catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases. Mr Shigley is president-elect-designee of the 41,000 member State Bar of Georgia, of which he will serve as president in 2011-12.

This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.

But recently I met members of a Georgia family who are incredibly blessed to be alive. A tractor trailer crossed the median of an interstate highway and struck them head-on. Another truck struck them from behind, knocking them back into the first truck. Miraculously, none of them were catastrophically injured. Of course they had some injuries, but it is amazing that anyone came out alive.

Ken Shigley is a trucking safety trial attorney representing seriously injured people and families of people killed in tractor trailer, big rig, semi, intermodal container freight, log truck, cement truck, dump truck and bus accidents statewide in Georgia.

Mr. Shigley has extensive experience representing parties in interstate trucking collision cases, and in the past two years has spoken at national interstate trucking litigation seminars in Chicago (trucking insurance), New Orleans (trial tactics and side underride issues), St. Louis (punitive damages), San Francisco (dealing with insolvent trucking companies), Atlanta (trucking insurance, closing argument), Nashville (use of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations), and Amelia Island (overview of trucking litigation).

He served as chair of the Southeastern Motor Carrier Litigation Institute in 2005, is a national board member of the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group of the American Association for Justice, and is on the National Advisory Board for the Association of Interstate Trucking Lawyers of America.

A Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy, he has been listed as a “Super Lawyer” (Atlanta Magazine), among the “Legal Elite” (Georgia Trend Magazine), and in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers (Martindale). In addition to trucking litigation, he has broad experience in products liability, catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death, spinal cord injury, brain injury and burn injury cases. Mr Shigley is currently Treasurer of the 41,000 member State Bar of Georgia, of which he will become President-Elect on 6/19/10 and President in on 6/4/11.This post is subject to our ethical disclaimer.