Truck accidents · · Updated
Learn how The Altman Law Firm preserves electronic truck data, driver logs, maintenance records, video, witness testimony, and other evidence to prove negligence after a Florida commercial truck crash
A serious commercial truck collision is not simply a larger version of an ordinary car accident. An 18-wheeler, tractor-trailer, delivery truck, dump truck, tanker, or other commercial vehicle may generate an extensive trail of electronic data, company records, inspection documents, communications, video, and physical evidence. That evidence can reveal not only what the driver did in the seconds before impact, but also whether the trucking company hired a qualified driver, enforced safety rules, maintained the truck, loaded the cargo safely, and placed business demands ahead of public safety.
At The Altman Law Firm, our investigation begins with a central question: What evidence will allow us to reconstruct the collision and hold every responsible party accountable? We do not rely on the trucking company or its insurer to identify and voluntarily produce all of the evidence that may prove its own negligence. We act promptly to locate, preserve, obtain, and analyze the available proof.
Trucking companies and their insurers may dispatch investigators, lawyers, and accident-response teams to the scene within hours. Meanwhile, crucial evidence can change or disappear. Vehicles may be repaired or placed back into service. Electronic data may be overwritten. Surveillance recordings may be deleted automatically. Skid marks and debris can be disturbed by traffic or weather. Witnesses become more difficult to locate, and memories fade.
One of our first steps is therefore to send detailed preservation-of-evidence notices, sometimes called spoliation letters, to the motor carrier and every other entity that may possess relevant evidence. Depending on the facts, those notices may be directed to the driver, trucking company, tractor owner, trailer owner, freight broker, shipper, cargo loader, maintenance contractor, towing facility, ELD or telematics provider, and applicable insurers.
The notice identifies the categories of physical and electronic evidence that must not be altered, destroyed, repaired, overwritten, or discarded. When necessary, we seek court intervention to inspect or preserve evidence before it is lost.
The commercial vehicle itself may be one of the most important pieces of evidence. We work to prevent destructive repairs or testing until qualified experts have an opportunity to inspect and document it. That inspection may include:
Federal regulations address systematic inspection, repair, and maintenance of commercial vehicles in 49 C.F.R. Part 396. The condition of the truck is compared with those requirements, the carrier’s own policies, manufacturer specifications, and accepted industry practices.
Modern commercial trucks can contain multiple sources of digital evidence. Depending on the vehicle and its equipment, we may seek data from:
This evidence may disclose vehicle speed, throttle use, braking, engine RPM, cruise-control status, steering inputs, sudden deceleration, GPS position, hours of operation, warning events, and the timing of impact. It may also reveal whether a collision-warning system alerted the driver and whether the driver reacted.
Electronic systems differ, and not every truck records the same information. A careful investigation identifies the systems actually installed, the party controlling each system, how long the information is retained, and the proper method for downloading it without changing the original data. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s event-data-recorder resource provides additional information about how vehicle event data may assist crash investigations.
Driver fatigue can affect perception, judgment, reaction time, lane control, and braking. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulates driving and on-duty time through the hours-of-service rules in 49 C.F.R. Part 395. Many regulated drivers use electronic logging devices, or ELDs, to record duty status. The FMCSA explains the operation and safety purpose of these systems on its official ELD website.
We do not examine the driver’s log in isolation. We compare it against independent records that may expose missing time, improper edits, unidentified driving, or falsification, including:
This comparison may show that the driver exceeded applicable limits, failed to obtain required rest, logged driving as off-duty time, or was given an unrealistic delivery schedule. It may also reveal a company culture in which dispatchers encouraged, rewarded, or ignored unsafe driving.
Florida law is important to this analysis. Florida Statute § 316.302 applies specified federal safety regulations to commercial motor vehicles operating in Florida, while also establishing exceptions and different hours-of-service provisions for certain intrastate operations. The applicable rules must therefore be evaluated based on the truck, cargo, route, and nature of the carrier’s operation.
Distracted driving may involve texting, calls, navigation, dispatch applications, streaming media, social media, eating, paperwork, or interaction with equipment inside the cab. We seek legally discoverable evidence such as:
The timing matters. A phone record alone may show that data was transmitted, but expert analysis and other evidence may be necessary to determine who was using the device and whether that use contributed to the crash.
When impairment or medical fitness may be involved, we investigate the evidence through lawful discovery and appropriate authorizations or subpoenas. Potential evidence includes post-crash testing, toxicology results, chain-of-custody documents, prior testing history when discoverable, prescriptions, medical certifications, and witness observations.
Federal controlled-substance and alcohol-testing requirements appear in 49 C.F.R. Part 382. Driver qualification and medical requirements are addressed in 49 C.F.R. Part 391. We examine whether required post-accident testing occurred, whether it was timely, and whether the carrier followed required procedures.
A trucking company must put qualified drivers behind the wheel. We seek the driver qualification and personnel materials that may show what the carrier knew—or should have known—before and during employment. Depending on the claims and applicable discovery rules, these materials may include:
This evidence may support claims for negligent hiring, qualification, training, supervision, retention, or entrustment. It can also show whether management ignored warning signs because the company needed a driver to keep loads moving.
A truck that travels tens of thousands of miles can become dangerous when inspection and maintenance are treated as paperwork rather than safety obligations. We request and analyze:
The records are compared with the vehicle’s actual condition. A newly created or backdated repair document may conflict with parts wear, electronic data, inspection reports, invoices, or testimony from the mechanics who performed the work. We also investigate whether the tractor, trailer, and maintenance operation were controlled by different companies so that every potentially responsible party is identified.
Improperly loaded or secured cargo can shift, spill, cause a rollover, increase stopping distance, or make a combination vehicle difficult to control. Evidence may include:
We determine who selected the carrier, who loaded the freight, who had the opportunity and duty to inspect it, and whether the load complied with applicable weight and securement rules. The investigation may extend beyond the driver and motor carrier to an independent loading company, shipper, broker, trailer owner, or other entity whose conduct contributed to the collision.
The roadway itself can explain how and why a collision occurred. We promptly seek to document and preserve:
Police measurements, body-camera video, drone images, total-station data, photographs, 911 calls, dispatch audio, and roadway-design records may supplement an independent scene inspection. In a disputed case, an accident-reconstruction expert can integrate physical evidence, vehicle damage, electronic data, video, and witness accounts to evaluate speed, perception-response time, braking, vehicle movement, and collision sequence.
Video may come from sources that are not obvious at the scene. We search for and send preservation requests concerning:
Many systems overwrite recordings within days or weeks. Locating cameras quickly can mean the difference between having an objective record of the crash and relying solely on conflicting recollections.
The crash report may identify only a fraction of the people with useful information. We look for motorists, passengers, first responders, nearby workers, residents, towing personnel, mechanics, loaders, dispatchers, safety directors, former employees, and others with relevant knowledge.
Witness testimony can establish erratic driving before impact, excessive speed, lane departures, delayed braking, cellphone use, admissions by the driver, the condition of the truck, the visibility of the collision, company practices, or prior notice of a safety problem. When appropriate, statements are preserved through recorded interviews, affidavits, depositions, or subpoenas.
Public and governmental records can provide an independent view of the driver and carrier. We may obtain:
The FMCSA’s free SAFER Company Snapshot provides basic carrier identification, inspection, crash, and safety-rating information. Under 49 C.F.R. § 390.15, motor carriers must maintain an accident register for three years and retain specified accident reports. Those records may identify patterns, related incidents, or witnesses with knowledge of company practices.
Public safety data is a starting point, not a substitute for case-specific discovery. A carrier’s safety history must be interpreted carefully, with attention to fleet size, relevant time periods, the nature of each violation, and whether the information is legally admissible for a particular purpose.
Written policies may address speed, following distance, adverse weather, backing, lane changes, fatigue, cellphone use, inspections, cargo, post-crash procedures, and driver discipline. We compare the written policy with what the company actually trained, monitored, enforced, and rewarded.
Relevant corporate evidence may include:
A policy that exists only on paper does not protect the public. If managers routinely disregarded electronic safety alerts, tolerated log violations, deferred necessary repairs, or pressured drivers to meet unrealistic schedules, the company’s own records may prove that the crash resulted from a broader management failure.
Once litigation begins, interrogatories, requests for production, requests for admission, subpoenas, corporate-representative depositions, and fact-witness depositions allow us to obtain evidence and require the defendants to commit to their positions.
We may depose the driver, safety director, dispatcher, maintenance personnel, cargo loaders, corporate representatives, records custodians, investigating officers, and other witnesses. We compare their testimony with the objective data and documents. Conflicts among a driver’s testimony, ELD data, video, dispatch records, and physical evidence can be powerful proof of negligence and credibility.
The name painted on a truck may not identify every responsible party. The tractor and trailer can have different owners. The driver may work for a carrier, staffing company, or contractor. Separate companies may have arranged the shipment, loaded the cargo, performed maintenance, or controlled dispatch and delivery requirements.
We examine ownership records, leases, operating authority, insurance filings, contracts, payroll records, dispatch control, and the actual relationships among the entities. Depending on the evidence and applicable law, potential claims may involve:
Every truck crash is different, and not every theory applies in every case. The purpose of a thorough investigation is to follow the evidence rather than assume that the driver is the only responsible party.
A safety-rule violation can be important, but a successful negligence case also requires proof connecting the wrongful conduct to the collision and the resulting harm. Our liability investigation therefore focuses on four related questions:
We organize the evidence so that a judge, insurance company, or jury can understand the complete sequence—from the company decision or driving error to the crash and its consequences.
The Altman Law Firm has represented injured people and families since 1998. In a serious Florida commercial trucking case, we move quickly to preserve evidence, identify the proper defendants and insurance coverage, retain qualified experts when necessary, and prepare the case as though it will be presented to a jury.
Our goal is not simply to collect a stack of records. It is to connect the physical evidence, electronic data, witness testimony, governing safety standards, and corporate decisions into a clear and persuasive account of what happened—and why it should not have happened.
If you or a family member has been injured in a collision involving an 18-wheeler or other commercial vehicle, contact The Altman Law Firm for a free case review or call (305) 373-3730. The sooner the investigation begins, the better the opportunity to preserve evidence that may prove the claim.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. The evidence, claims, deadlines, and regulations applicable to a particular collision depend on its facts. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.