Truck driver liability rules under review in multiple states -

Legislative pursuits in a growing number of states address tort reform related to truck drivers.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has long advocated for reform to civil liability rules to reduce lawsuit abuse around the nation. The Association says that plaintiff’s lawyers constantly grow more aggressive with theories and arguments, trying to reach into the pockets of truck drivers who often have little-to-no fault for an unfortunate accident.

Indiana

Indiana state lawmakers acted a year ago to enact tort reform. Multiple bills introduced in the opening weeks of the 2025 regular session aim to go further in addressing civil actions involving truck drivers.

The 2024 state law allowed seat belt usage to be considered in accident lawsuits. Previously, Indiana prohibited seat belt information from being made available to juries.

The new law permits juries in civil lawsuits related to vehicle accidents to hear whether the victim was wearing a seat belt. The information can then be used when considering damages.

Advocates said it is important that the state not stand in the way of juries’ access to information about whether a vehicle occupant was wearing a seat belt.

One bill would prohibit trucking companies from being sued for their role in a crash unless the truck driver has first been found liable in court – a process called a bifurcated trial. A defendant would be allowed to file a motion to bifurcate within a specified period of time.

SB37 states that the first phase of a bifurcated trial would determine any negligence and compensatory damages of the truck operator. If the truck driver is proven to be at fault, the trial would move to a second phase.

During the second phase, broader evidence about the company’s past would be allowed. Allowable evidence during this phase could include an employer’s failure to comply with an applicable local, state or federal regulation or standard.

Bill advocates said the rule revisions would protect trucking companies from biased and unfair courtroom tactics. One example provided is a plaintiff attorney submitting evidence at trial about a trucking company’s broader practices. The tactic is intended to convey to a jury that crashes are a systemic problem with a trucking operation.

Another Senate bill covers commercial vehicle defendant liability.

SB490 addresses the amount a plaintiff can receive from a defendant for civil cases related to wrecks with commercial vehicles. The defendant can be the owner, employer or driver operating the truck.

Noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, awarded in a civil suit involving a commercial vehicle would be capped at $1 million.

The cap rule would not apply to the truck driver. Additionally, the rule would not apply to the truck owner or employer if the driver “acted with gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct.”

Both bills await consideration in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Nebraska

One Nebraska bill covers civil action involving a commercial vehicle.

LB79 states if an employer admits the person in question was an employee or independent contractor and was acting within the scope of employment, the employer’s liability would be decided solely on the legal doctrine of respondeat superior.

Respondeat superior is a legal doctrine that holds an employer responsible for the actions of their employees if those actions are committed within the scope of employment, according to Cornell Law School.

The bill is in the Judiciary Committee.

Pennsylvania

Comprehensive tort reform for truck drivers is in the works at the Pennsylvania statehouse.

Rep. Torren Ecker, R-New Oxford, said there is an “urgent need for tort reform in Pennsylvania.” He has highlighted the effect of excessive litigation in the state.

“Our civil justice system must protect the innocent while eliminating the burdens that hinder growth,” Ecker said during a news conference to address tort reform.

Potential reforms include introducing seat belt usage in accident lawsuits, regulating third-party litigation funding, capping contingency fees and creating a Fair Share Repair Act.

The Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association supports the reform package. Rebecca Oyler, PMTA president, said Commonwealth law prohibits motor carriers from defending themselves in court with evidence that a plaintiff was not wearing a seat belt at the time of an incident.

“A plaintiff’s own negligence in choosing not to wear a seat belt should be and is probative evidence to present the full facts of a particular incident – including how injuries occurred,” Oyler previously stated.

Another focus of the reform package is the state’s Fair Share Act.

Oyler said judges have chipped away at the tenants of the act. As a result, its scope has been limited while liability has expanded.

She added that reform would restore the act “to its original, equitable and carefully balanced original meaning, ensuring that trucking companies are not unfairly and disproportionately targeted.” LL