Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

Last month, a federal appellate court issued an opinion in an Indiana personal injury accident that required the court to interpret the Indiana Comparative Fault Act. Ultimately, the court concluded that the evidence presented indicated that the plaintiff was more than 50% at fault for his injuries, and thus dismissal of the plaintiff’s case under the Comparative Fault Act was appropriate.

The Indiana Comparative Fault Act is contained in Indiana Code sections 34-51-2-5 and 34-51-2-6, and provides the system that courts use to determine whether an accident victim who shares fault for their own injuries can pursue a claim against other potentially liable parties. Specifically, the Act states that “any contributory fault chargeable to the claimant diminishes proportionately the amount awarded as compensatory damages … but does not bar recovery” except as provided by section 34-51-2-6.

Section 34-51-2-6 explains that a plaintiff cannot recover for their injuries if their fault is “greater than the fault of all persons whose fault proximately contributed to the claimant’s damages.” While this sounds quite confusing, in practice the Comparative Fault Act precludes a plaintiff’s recovery if they were more than 50% at fault for the accident that caused their injuries.

We recently addressed a wrongful death lawsuit brought in federal court that invokes Nebraska’s fetal death statute, and how that law differs from corresponding statutes in Indiana. The lawsuit, Baumann v. Slezak, et al, also asserts a cause of action for alleged violations of federal commercial truck driving regulations, including restrictions on the number of hours a driver may be behind the wheel without a break. Indiana law has allowed for evidence of regulatory violations in order to prove a claim of negligence, although such evidence may not be sufficient to establish liability by itself.

The Nebraska lawsuit arises from a September 9, 2012 accident on westbound Interstate 80 in western Nebraska. A family traveling through the state in two separate cars was stopped at the rear of a line of traffic, which had backed up nearly a mile because of an accident involving two semi-trailers. Another semi-trailer collided with the back of one of the family’s vehicles. This propelled the car into the family’s other car, which collided with another vehicle. All occupants of the two vehicles died in the accident. The truck driver, Josef Slezak, was allegedly driving at seventy-five miles per hour, and did not slow or stop prior to the collision.

The family’s legal representatives filed suit against Slezak and his employer, alleging negligence per se and violation of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations. The two regulations cited in the complaint prohibit operating a commercial motor vehicle while impaired, such as by fatigue, and regulate the length of time a vehicle operator may drive without rest. The hours-of-service (HOS) regulations prescribe maximum lengths of time a driver can be on-duty or behind the wheel before a required period of time off duty. According to the complaint, Slezak had arrived at a trucking terminal in Milwaukee, Wisconsin at 10:49 a.m. on September 8, and left after less than three hours off duty at 1:49 p.m. The accident occurred more than eighteen hours later, at around 5:19 a.m., and about 920 miles away.
Continue reading

Articles Posted in Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Decisions

Federal Court Interprets Indiana’s Comparative Fault Act in Recent Personal Injury Case

Commercial Trucker Hours-of-Service Regulations Invoked in Wrongful Death Lawsuit