Family of Deceased Truck Driver Recovers $1.75 Million for Defective Tire
Settlement Amount: $1.75 million
Participating Attorneys: James A. Roberts, III and Matthew D. Quinn
During the course of our busy day-to-day lives, we all drive down the highway at 60 mph, jumping between this appointment and that appointment. We don’t often stop this hustle-and-bustle to consider just how much that our safety depends upon the quality of the tires which enable us to zoom down the highway to that next appointment. However, Lewis & Roberts recently settled a tragic wrongful death case involving a defective tire which perfectly illustrates the importance of safely designed and manufactured tires.
Lewis & Roberts represented the surviving family of a truck driver who was killed due to a tire blowout. In 2017, the truck driver was operating a tractor-trailer on an interstate in North Carolina when a front passenger-side tire suffered a sudden and catastrophic failure when the tread and belts separated from the carcass of the tire. As a result, the tractor-trailer became immediately uncontrollable, ran off the right side of the interstate, collided with a guard rail, jackknifed while going down an embankment, and collided with a tree. The truck driver survived for approximately four (4) minutes before passing away at the scene from exsanguination and traumatic amputation of the left arm.
Following an investigation, including retention of a tire failure expert, our firm learned that the failed tire was defectively designed and manufactured. Unfortunately, the tire manufacturer cannot be disclosed due to a confidentiality agreement. However, we learned that the tire was defectively designed because the inner liner was too thin, leading to intracarcass pressurization and oxidative degradation of the body ply and belt skim coat. Further, the tire was defectively manufactured because the belt assembly gave rise to concentrations of strain energy density in the laminated structure, and furthermore, the manufacture resulted in inadequate adhesion between the first belt/shoulder cushion and body ply, and between belts 2 and 3. Simply put, the inner liner was designed too thin, and the belt assembly was negligently manufactured.
Given these defects with the subject tire, our firm filed a wrongful death civil action on behalf of the truck driver’s estate against the tire manufacturer, tire importer and tire distributer. Consistent with most tire defects cases, the litigation was extremely hard fought, but we were able to develop substantial evidence of the tire’s defect. For example, we deposed the tractor-trailer’s owner and learned that the subject tire was inspected during the morning of the incident and had an acceptable, safe tread depth. Further, the tractor-trailer’s owner was able to confirm that the tractor-trailer was not overloaded.
Further, our firm hired an accident reconstructionist, who confirmed that the tire failure was the cause of the accident and that it was not possible for decedent to maintain control of the tractor-trailer after the detread event.
Testimony of law enforcement officers was particularly important during the litigation. Two investigating officers testified that the cause of the incident was tire failure, and that the truck driver’s reaction to the tire failure did not contribute to the wreck.
The truck driver was unmarried and had no children at the time of his death. His parents, who were entitled to the proceeds of the settlement, lived out-of-state. The decedent had not provided financial support to his parents at the time of his death. However, we developed the estate’s damages by hiring an economist to project the present monetary value of the decedent’s future income and the value of the truck driver’s services, protection, care and assistance to his parents. In response, the defendants argued that the decedent was in poor health and had a significantly reduced life expectancy due to several preexisting health issues, such as Type 2 diabetes.
The litigation was subject to several significant hurdles which frequently bedevil plaintiffs in tire defects cases. For example, the tire manufacturer was a foreign corporation, which presented several difficult problems: the bulk of the case documents were in a foreign language, it was difficult to obtain service of process, and we fought against a formidable personal jurisdiction defense. Additionally, despite the helpful assistance of the tractor-trailer’s owner, little was known about the tire’s maintenance history, chain-of-custody or condition.
This was an extremely difficult and hard-fought case. Lewis & Roberts’s litigation skills, including our ability to identify and retain a team of experts, enabled us to obtain an excellent result for the truck driver’s family.