Defense Verdict Affirmed for Western Express in Rear-end Accident
In August 2018, a summer thunderstorm blew in suddenly, darkening a sunny day in Rockbridge County, Virginia. In a matter of seconds, an intense downpour blinded drivers traveling along the rolling terrain of Interstate 81.
In the chaos of the rainstorm, a work van struck a car that had stopped in the left lane, and then a mini-van hit the work van and spun into the grassy median. A Western Express tractor-trailer driver saw the wreckage in front of him and quickly braked and steered left to avoid the accident. Dash-camera footage showed how he avoided at least one accident and almost threaded the needle between the disabled cars, but the truck clipped the corner of the work van—the third collision for the work van the plaintiff was driving. The plaintiff was severely injured in the accident.
Western Express contested liability but did not contest that the plaintiff had incurred approximately $337,000.00 in past medical expenses. Plaintiff and his attorneys, however, wanted a bigger payday. He sued Western Express and its driver for more than $10 million, citing negligence by both the truck driver and the company, and requesting punitive damages—a form of damages designed to punish and deter bad behavior.
Gentry Locke employed a team of lawyers with vast experience in the transportation industry to successfully defend the driver against these claims at trial before a Lynchburg jury in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. In motions practice, Federal Judge Norman Moon dismissed Plaintiff’s claim that Western Express had been negligent in hiring the truck driver and excluded two of Plaintiff’s experts – a weather expert and purported trucking industry expert, Michael Napier.
For three-and-a-half days, Plaintiff’s lawyers presented evidence for their claim, which included a brain injury specialist who said that the plaintiff suffered a permanent brain injury requiring future surgery that alone cost more than $135,000.00—in addition to the $337,000.00 already incurred. The plaintiff appeared in court just once, taking the stand to testify.
Gentry Locke’s team presented a concise, cogent defense. Independent witnesses confirmed that the weather turned from sunny to a torrential downpour in seconds. A neuropsychologist and a neurologist successfully disputed Plaintiff’s claim that he had not largely recovered from his injuries, including a moderate traumatic brain injury, and discredited the expert that claimed future surgery was necessary.
The defense team showed the jury how the tractor-trailer driver did everything he could to avoid an unavoidable accident – even beating the truck’s high-tech safety system by braking before an automated alert sounded.
The defense strategy succeeded. The jury took a little over an hour to determine that that the Western Express driver was not liable and rendered a defense verdict. There would be no “nuclear verdict” or any cash award of any kind. In fact, Plaintiff had to pay a portion of Western Express’s legal costs.
After the verdict was rendered, the plaintiff sought a do-over. He lodged a three-part appeal, in which he challenged the exclusion of his two experts as well as the pretrial dismissal of his negligent-hiring claim against Western Express. Ultimately, all three arguments fell flat.
In a published opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment. It held that the district court properly excluded both experts and that the jury’s no-negligence defense verdict foreclosed the plaintiff’s negligent-hiring claim. The defense verdict in this rear-end accident consequently stands.
“The jury said, ‘Enough is enough,’” said Ashley Winsky, who led Gentry Locke’s trial team with assistance from Jeff Miller and Guy Harbert. Staff members and other attorneys in the firm’s Civil Defense Litigation practice group worked diligently on the case for nearly five years leading up to trial. And all of them saw it through to the end, working hand-in-hand with Gentry Locke’s appellate team of Monica Monday and Dave Berry.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment. It held that the district court properly excluded both experts and that the jury’s no-negligence defense verdict foreclosed the plaintiff’s negligent-hiring claim. The defense verdict in this rear-end accident consequently stands.