Goldberg Segalla’s Zealous Defense Clears Commercial Trucking Company in Accident Claim
Goldberg Segalla partners Stephen A. Sheinen and Christina L. Capobianco secured a critical victory for a commercial trucking company and its driver who were wrongly alleged responsible for a seven-vehicle accident in the summer of 2021.
Making the outcome especially impressive is recent Pennsylvania case law has abrogated the PA Fair Share Act in cases where the plaintiff is not comparatively at fault, so our clients could have been held responsible for paying the entire verdict even if found to be only 1 percent at fault for the accident.
The case involved a multi-vehicle incident that occurred directly behind our clients’ tractor-trailer. The plaintiff was struck by a vehicle operated by a co-defendant in the case when he failed to observe traffic that slowed ahead.
Both police and the plaintiff, who did not file a claim against our clients, believed the co-defendant caused the accident. However, the co-defendant joined our clients as additional defendants, alleging the driver abruptly switched from the left to the right lane, causing the drivers of six trailing vehicles to brake abruptly, resulting in a chain reaction that caused the accident.
The plaintiff made a $300,000 global demand. The major risk faced in defending the case was that if our clients were found even remotely at fault, the plaintiff could have collected the entire judgment from our client, which is permissible in Pennsylvania when there is no finding of comparative negligence. This was a potential problem as the co-defendants were underinsured, only possessing $115K in collective insurance coverage.
After several depositions, whereby it was established there was no evidence of an abrupt or sudden stop or quick lane change by our client, Steve moved for summary judgment.
The co-defendant’s counsel argued that there was an issue of fact precluding the entry of summary judgment. Our position, however, was succinct: We argued the co-defendant testified that no one was at fault for the accident. Therefore, his testimony in this regard obviously encompassed our clients and completely cleared them of fault.
After several rounds of briefing and oral argument, the judge entered an order dismissing our clients with prejudice.
Steve’s insistence on sticking to the simple facts of the case, combined with his compelling and convincing oral argument, is what swung this outcome in the favor of our clients. The strategy Steve and Christina employed throughout the case saved our client hundreds of thousands of dollars, highlighting Goldberg Segalla’s commitment to finding practical, effective solutions for clients.