|
BOSTON, MA -- An Arizona jury recently ordered a trucking company to pay a tow truck
driver whose leg was severed when an exhausted trucker lost control of his 18-wheel
rig and slammed into him on Christmas Eve four years ago.
The jury decided that Little Bear Transport should pay Bruce Austin in compensatory
damages and punitive damages.
The plaintiff claimed that the transport company and its long-distance driver flaunted
public safety and federal laws limiting driving hours.
"The jury wanted to send a message to the trucking industry that this won't
be tolerated," said Richard Gonzales, who represented Austin. "The jury
wants the trucking industry to stop playing around with public safety."
Gonzales said the industry pushes drivers to work long hours, making them distracted,
tired and unsafe.
When he talked to jurors after the trial, they said "this was the kind of case
that should come to trial," according to Gonzales. "They were very angry
because they knew that this puts the public at risk."
Pushing the limits
On Christmas Eve, 2001, Austin was called to the scene of a fatal accident. He was
hitching the car to his tow truck in a median strip of Interstate 10 near Bowie,
Ariz., when an 18-wheeler driven by Kenneth Virgil Howard barreled through the median
strip, hitting Austin and cutting off his right leg. The 58-year-old plaintiff also
lost his left thumb, broke several ribs and fractured his left shoulder.
Gonzales said that the driver, who lives in Utah, said he was traveling at about
70 mph when a car in front of him slowed down. He lost control of his rig when he
hit the brakes, causing the tractor trailer truck to careen into the median strip
and slam into several vehicles that had been involved in the previous accident.
Gonzales told jurors the accident was not so simple. He argued that it was the culmination
of many forces, including company policies that push drivers to drive extended hours
and falsify their driving logs in order to circumvent federal limits on driving
hours.
At trial, officers from the Arizona Department of Public Safety testified that they
caught Howard making changes in his logbook while he sat in his rig at the accident
scene.
The defense argued that accident wasn't caused by sleepiness and noted that Howard
was not swerving or driving the way a sleepy driver would drive.
But Gonzales countered that argument, saying the driver was obviously distracted,
and described the scene to jurors.
"My client was lying on his back hooking a vehicle in the median strip. There
were emergency vehicles, squad cars, lights, cones and flares. There was no way
you could miss this," Gonzales said. "There was no question of drugs or
alcohol. But he just came barreling into that median strip. He never even braked.
He was either fatigued or inattentive, and that's why the laws are out there - to
protect from fatigued or inattentive and distracted drivers."
Howard admitted to police at the accident scene that he had falsified his daily
logbook. He said he was driving longer than allowed because he was trying to get
home to Salt Lake City for Christmas.
But Gonzales said this was not a one-time violation for Howard. He told jurors that
the logbook showed the trucker falsified the logs for the whole week before the
accident.
'Evil' intent
The trucking company admitted liability before trial, leaving jurors to grapple
only with the question of damages.
In order to prove punitive damages, Gonzales had to prove "evil" intent.
"We argued that he knowingly pursued his own interest, knowing that it created
risks to others. In this case, he said he was trying to get home and he falsified
logs even though he was over the limit - and in doing so he knew he was putting
the public at risk," said Gonzales.
He argued that the trucking company - which has records of gas slips and mileage
to compare with log books - could easily see that Howard was not following driving
hour limits.
"The trucking company knows," Gonzales said. "It's a game of cat-and-mouse
and the industry allows it to happen as long as the drivers are making money for
the company."
Gonzales said his client lost his tow-truck company and vehicle repair shop after
the accident, although he has been able to keep other businesses that he owns, such
as a store and Laundromat.
Plaintiff's attorney: Richard Gonzales of The Gonzales Law Firm in Tucson, Ariz.
The case: Austin v. Little Bear Transport; Nov. 9, 2006; U.S. District Court for
the District of Arizona; Judge Raner C. Collins.
|