Why truck accident claims differ from car accidents
A collision with a commercial truck is not simply a bigger car accident. Interstate carriers are regulated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which sets enforceable rules on driver hours of service, vehicle inspection, maintenance records and driver qualification. A violation of those rules is independent evidence of negligence that has no equivalent in an ordinary car case.
Liability also reaches further. Beyond the driver, a claim may involve the motor carrier, the trailer owner, a maintenance contractor, the cargo loader, or a broker who arranged the load. Carriers are generally responsible for employee drivers acting in the course of work, and may face separate claims for negligent hiring, training or supervision.
Evidence is time-sensitive in a way most claimants underestimate. Electronic logging devices, engine control module data, dashcam footage and driver qualification files are subject to retention schedules measured in months. A preservation letter sent early is often what determines whether that evidence still exists.
Truck evidence can be lawfully destroyed on a schedule
Federal rules require carriers to keep certain records for limited periods — some driver logs for only six months. Absent a preservation demand, routine deletion is not spoliation. This is the main reason truck claims are investigated far earlier than car claims.
Motorcycle claims and the bias problem
Motorcycle riders are dramatically over-represented in serious injury statistics, largely because there is no structure between the rider and the road. The most common fault pattern is a driver turning left across a rider’s path or changing lanes into one, frequently described afterwards as not having seen the motorcycle.
Riders face an evidentiary problem that car occupants do not: insurers and juries often assume the rider was speeding or riding recklessly, even without evidence. Helmet use adds a further wrinkle, because in some states evidence of not wearing one can reduce damages for head injury, while in others it is inadmissible entirely.
Rideshare claims and the period rules
Uber and Lyft claims are decided largely by what the driver was doing at the moment of the crash, because coverage is structured in periods. With the app off, only the driver’s personal policy applies. With the app on but no ride accepted, the platform provides limited contingent liability cover. Once a ride is accepted and while a passenger is aboard, a substantially larger commercial policy — commonly one million dollars — applies.
Because drivers are generally classified as independent contractors rather than employees, injured people usually cannot hold the platform vicariously liable the way they could an employer. Claims against the platforms themselves tend to be framed differently, around screening, background checks or app design.
Sections in This Category
Each section below groups the cases that share a defendant, a product or a legal theory, and sets out what those cases have in common before linking to the individual coverage.
- Rideshare and Delivery Platform Lawsuits — 13 cases
- Vehicle Defect Lawsuits — 16 cases