WASHINGTON — Higher jury awards against trucking companies involved in road accidents are no longer driven primarily by crash severity but by pre-crash negligence, according to the latest research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI).
ATRI’s Trucking Litigation: A Forensic Analysis, released on Wednesday, found that allegations related to a carrier’s organizational failures now carry financial multipliers that exceed most on-road infractions, marking a shift in plaintiff strategy since ATRI’s 2020 report on nuclear verdicts in trucking.
Substance abuse or driving while under the influence was the most potent financial multiplier identified, which is associated with an expected increase in total awards of 340.7% when controlling for all other forms of negligence, according to ATRI.
Trailing closely were failures in employer administrative oversight: allegations of improper hiring or onboarding were found to generate an expected increase of 272.3% in total awards. That was followed by gross negligence (193.4% award increase) and speeding (56.1% increase).
This financial exposure is further compounded by cumulative risk.
“While there was considerable variability in awards especially in cases with just one negligent behavior, each additional negligent behavior increased expected total awards by approximately 86.5%,” ATRI’s research revealed. “Cases with fewer types of negligence are likely to be more favorable for defendants.”
While certain types of negligence drive the size of individual awards, the research also quantified a massive industry-wide loss resulting from procedural manipulation in state courts.
In 2022, the report estimates there were 12,817 state truck-tractor tort cases, and as many as 147 of those were prevented from reaching federal court. ATRI estimates an annual financial loss exceeding $102.8 million resulting from cases that are eligible for being litigated in federal courts but remain in state courts due to procedural barriers.
The median trial award in state courts, according to ATRI’s data, was roughly $1.1 million higher than in federal courts.
“Trucking may be more vulnerable to these potential state court biases than other industries during litigation due to the fact that trucking firms operate in a wide range of locales in which they have no continual presence or physical base,” the report stated. “Without these more obvious forms of local involvement, jurists may fail to appreciate trucking’s role in their community and mistakenly view trucking companies as outsiders.”
