GET A FREE CONSULTATION
(702) 680-1111
Founding Member & Managing Partner at Gina Corena & Associates
Practice Areas: Personal Injury
Accidents involving large commercial trucks often leave victims with life-changing injuries and major financial losses. While victims may expect compensation, trucking companies rarely make the process easy. These companies, backed by powerful insurers and defense teams, use several legal defenses to minimize or deny liability.
Understanding these trucking company defenses can help victims and families recognize the challenges they might face during a truck accident claim. This article explains the most common legal tactics used by trucking companies, how they work, and what steps can strengthen your claim if you’re involved in a serious truck accident.
When a truck accident occurs, the financial exposure for trucking companies can be significant. Settlements often involve medical expenses, property damage, and lost wages. To protect their bottom line, these companies and their insurers invest heavily in legal defenses in truck accidents that shift or reduce blame.
Trucking companies often act quickly after a crash sending investigators to the scene, securing logbooks, and gathering driver statements. Their defense goal is clear: control the narrative before victims have the chance to collect evidence.
This early action can make it harder for injured parties to prove negligence unless they respond just as promptly with their own documentation.
One of the most common defenses in trucking lawsuits involves comparative negligence, a legal concept used in many states, including Nevada. Under this rule, trucking companies argue that the victim was partly responsible for the accident through speeding, distraction, or unsafe maneuvers.
If this defense succeeds, the amount of compensation a victim receives may be reduced by their percentage of fault.
Under NRS 41.141, a plaintiff’s damages are reduced by their percentage of fault. If the plaintiff is found 50% or more responsible, they cannot recover damages.
To overcome this argument, strong evidence such as witness statements, black box data, and expert accident reconstruction is essential. Establishing that the truck driver’s negligence played the dominant role is key to countering shared fault claims.
Another defense frequently used by trucking companies is the sudden emergency doctrine. This legal argument claims that the driver faced an unexpected and unavoidable event, forcing an immediate reaction that led to the crash.
For instance, a driver may claim that a vehicle suddenly swerved into their lane, that a tire blew out, or that debris appeared on the road without warning. If the event truly was unforeseeable, and the driver’s response was reasonable, this defense can reduce liability.
However, the doctrine fails when the “emergency” could have been avoided through proper maintenance or alert driving. For example, mechanical failure caused by poor upkeep or fatigue from overworked drivers does not qualify as a true sudden emergency.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that driver fatigue is a factor in about 13% of large truck crashes nationwide.
Defense lawyers often challenge the link between the accident and the victim’s injuries. This tactic, known as disputing causation, suggests that the injuries were pre-existing or caused by something unrelated to the crash.
Trucking companies may request extensive medical records or hire their own medical experts to testify that the injuries stem from another source. They might even argue that a victim’s symptoms are exaggerated.
To address this, victims need consistent medical documentation, timely treatment, and expert testimony. Showing that the injury appeared immediately after the crash and worsened over time can help establish a clear connection between the accident and the resulting harm.
If you ever find yourself unsure about how to respond to these complex tactics, consulting an experienced Las Vegas truck accident lawyer can help you understand how these defenses are used and what evidence is needed to challenge them effectively.
Trucking companies frequently argue that they followed all federal safety regulations, known as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). While compliance can support their defense, it doesn’t automatically mean the company wasn’t negligent.
Common areas they focus on include hours of service, vehicle inspections, driver qualifications, and drug or alcohol testing. These records can appear flawless on paper but still hide deeper issues such as falsified logs or incomplete maintenance.
Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) became mandatory for most commercial carriers in 2019, making it easier to verify driving hours and spot irregularities.
|
Regulation Area |
Typical Defense Claim |
What to Review or Question |
| Hours of Service | Logbooks show compliance | Cross-check ELD data, fuel receipts, and GPS logs |
| Vehicle Maintenance | Regular inspections performed | Review repair reports and inspection history |
| Driver Qualification | Proper training completed | Verify license, experience, and safety record |
| Drug & Alcohol Testing | Negative test results | Check testing frequency and procedures for accuracy |
Even if a trucking company meets FMCSR standards, negligence may still exist if the driver acted carelessly or the vehicle had known safety issues that weren’t properly addressed.
Another strategy trucking companies use is the independent contractor defense. They argue that the driver was not an employee but an independent operator, meaning the company is not liable for the driver’s actions.
Courts examine the true nature of the relationship and how much control the company had over the driver’s schedule, pay structure, and routes. If the company controlled key aspects of the driver’s work, it may still share responsibility regardless of contractual wording.
This distinction becomes critical because it determines who can be held accountable for damages in a truck accident lawsuit.
Timing can also become a defense. Trucking companies often argue that a victim missed the statute of limitations or failed to file necessary paperwork correctly.
In Nevada, the statute of limitations for personal injury claims, including truck accidents, is generally two years from the date of the crash. Missing this deadline may allow the defense to have the case dismissed.
Keeping documentation organized such as police reports, photos, and correspondence is vital. Delays or incomplete evidence can be used by insurers as grounds for reducing or denying a claim.
Comparative negligence, sudden emergency, FMCSR compliance, independent contractor status, and causation challenges are among the most common strategies trucking companies use.
If you share a fault, your compensation is reduced proportionally. At 50% or more fault, you’re barred from recovery under Nevada’s comparative negligence law.
No. Compliance supports safe operation but doesn’t remove responsibility if the driver or company still acted negligently during the incident.
They attempt to show that injuries stemmed from pre-existing conditions or unrelated events, aiming to reduce compensation amounts.
An independent contractor works under their own authority, using personal equipment, while employees operate under company control and supervision.
Typically, victims must file within two years from the accident date, as required under Nevada’s statute of limitations.
Trucking companies have an extensive list of defenses designed to minimize payouts and shift responsibility after a crash. By understanding how these tactics work, especially defenses like comparative negligence, sudden emergency, and FMCSR compliance, victims can better prepare their claims and protect their rights.
If you’ve been involved in a serious truck accident, understanding these defenses can help you approach your claim more confidently. Gina Corena & Associates offers guidance to Nevada residents navigating truck accident claims. Contact the firm today for a free consultation and learn more about your legal options.
As founder of Gina Corena & Associates, she is dedicated to fighting for the rights of the people who suffer life-changing personal injuries in car, truck and motorcycle accidents as well as other types of personal injury. Gina feels fortunate to serve the Nevada community and hold wrongdoers accountable for their harm to her clients.
