Texas Truck Accident Lawyer Blog

A 25-year-old Fort Worth man who was drunk pulled his Honda out in front of a Shale Tank truck at 4:00 o'clock this morning at the I-20/820 interchange and caused the tanker to crash through a retaining wall and dangle 100 feel off of the ground.

The story was so dramatic that it made the national news.

Nicholas Colon, 25, and his wife Amy Howell, 26, were pinned beneath the empty water truck in their car for three hours before firefighters could extricate them.

It is a miracle the tanker did not fall onto vehicles below and cause catastrophic injuries.

Colon was taken into custody at JPS Hospital on suspicion of DWI and unlawfully carrying a weapon. Scary, huh?

Willard, also 25, was in the cab for about an hour until firefighters could rig a harness on a ladder truck to reach him.

Fort Worth police and firefighters performed heroic measures to save the three people.
They used hydraulic cutters to open the passenger side and pulled Colon and Howell to safety.

The tanker caused a 13 foot hole in the wall, but the Texas Department of Public Safety investigated it and found it to be structurally sound.

"Given the situation, I was relatively surprised that everyone was in good shape," Officer Hatch of the Fort Worth Police Department said.

The ramp will be closed from 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sunday to repair the wall, Lopez said.

Think it's time to crack down on drunk drivers? In August 2006, Colon was convicted of driving while intoxicated in Dallas County and received 18 months probation.

More than 4,000 people are killed in truck collisions each year. Driver fatigue is a factor in 30 to 40 percent of these crashes. Research shows the risk of a crash increases twofold after eight hours of consecutive driving.

The proposed rules for commercial truck drivers do not provide the adequate level of protection needed to prevent driver fatigue, according to the American Association for Justice (AAJ), an organization I have belonged to for over 25 years, including its Interstate Trucking Litigation Group.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has recommended a 10-hour driving time limit. However it has stated it may just keep the current 11-hour requirement.

"Driver fatigue puts not only the truck driver workforce at risk, but also other passengers who share the road. Ensuring our roads are safe should be the FMCSA's top priority," said AAJ President Gibson Vance.

AAJ also opposes FMCSA's proposed 34-hour restart period, which would allow truck drivers to bypass the 60/70-hour duty limit. This 34-hour restart period cannot ensure a truck driver receives proper rest.

AAJ recommends that the FMCSA mandate a 48-hour restart requirement to provide commercial truck drivers with greater rest and recovery time after working long hours. It would also shorten the work week, meaning less fatigued drivers and safer highways.

I strongly support AAJ's position and urge you to contact Congresswoman Kay Granger or your local representative and tell them we need stronger laws to make our roads safer.

In trucking crashes, the difference between whether a load is being driven "interstate" or "intrastate" is critical.

From as far back as the Texas Supreme Court's holding in Texas & No.R.R. v. Sabine Tram Co., 227 U.S. 111, 123 (1923) and continuing through Central Freight v. l.E,E., 899 F.2d 413, 419 (5th Cir. 1990), the crucial factor is the shipper's fixed and persistent intent at the time of shipment.

If the cargo is being shipped from California to Florida, it is well settled in the trucking industry that the movement of goods and the intent of the shipper determines whether the goods are shipped in interstate commerce. Matter of American Truck and Trailer Repair, Docket RI-92-001, 58 Fed. Reg. 16916 at 16921, March 31 1993 (Order, August 6,1992).

In United States v. Yellow Cab Co., 332 U.S. 218, 228-229 (1974), the United States Supreme Court held "when persons or goods move from a point of origin in one state to a point of destination in another, the fact that part of the journey consists of transportation by an independent agency solely within the boundaries of one state does not make that portion of the trip any less interstate in character. That portion must be viewed in its relation to the entire journey rather than in isolation. So viewed, it is an integral step in the interstate movement".

The term "interstate commerce" within the meaning of the FMCSRs and underlying statutes is not synonymous with transport across state lines, and can include operations conducted wholly within a single state. Whether transportation between two points in one state is considered to be part of an interstate movement is determined by the essential character of the commerce, manifested by the shipper's fixed and persisting intent at the time of the shipment, and is ascertained from all the facts and circumstances surrounding the transportation. In the Matter of Solomon Trucker, Jr., Docket No. FHWA-1997-2417 (Final Order, June 2,1998) citing to Baltimore & o.s. WR. Co. V. Settle, 260 U.S. 166 (1922) and Texas v. U.S., 866 F.2d 1546 (5 th Cir.), reh'g denied, 874 F.2d 812 (1989).

When the intent of the transportation being performed is interstate in nature, even when the route is within the boundaries of a single state, the driver and commercial motor vehicle are subject to the FMCSR. In the Matter of Gunther's Leasing Transport, Inc., Docket No. FHWA-1997-2400.

As long as the cargo transported originates and terminates in different states, an interstate portion of the transportation must still be viewed as interstate. See Id. citing to In the Matter of National Transportation Service, Inc., Docket No. 92-FL-028-FR (Final Order, October 21,1994).

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has stated that passengers in cars may be decapitated if their vehicles go under the rear of heavy-duty trailer trucks with guards -- even if the vehicles meet U.S. rules designed to prevent severe injuries.

I have handled these decapitation cases before, and they are truly horrendous.

I believe the tests show stronger rules are needed. The Institute has also recently said that trailers made to Canadian specifications were less likely to cause catastrophic injuries.

According to NHTSA data, 419 car occupants were killed in 2007 and 352 in 2008 in crashes involving passenger vehicles striking the rear of large trucks.
Almost 80 percent of crashes involving cars rear-ending trucks involved significant amounts of underride, even after NHTSA required stronger structures to be lowered to 22 inches off the ground.

NHTSA doesn't require the guards to be tested on trailers themselves, which has led to weaknesses: guards can fail if hardware attaching them to the trailer isn't strong enough to withstand impact. The tests underscore that guards installed to U.S. standards aren't holding up out in the real world.

NHTSA expects to complete its review of the regulation in 2012.

Canadian regulators require stronger crash guards. However trailers made by a corporation based in Lafayette, Indiana are engineered to exceed the Canadian requirements.

I feel very strongly that the U.S. standards for these guards are far too low and hope they are strengthened immediately.

Please call if you have been involved in an 18-wheeler wreck; I fight these trucking companies to get you the financial recovery that you deserve.