Our team at Lexigate recently attended the inaugural Truck & Auto Accident Summit, a three-day event organized by the National Trial Lawyers. Held in the vibrant city of Chicago, the summit focused exclusively on the intricacies of truck and auto accident cases, exploring how to secure, litigate, and achieve the best outcomes for clients involved in these complex cases. The beautiful weather mirrored the bright insights shared at the summit, making our time in Chicago both enjoyable and enriching.
Key Takeaways from the Summit’s Standout Sessions
The summit featured numerous sessions that provided valuable insights into legal strategies, negotiation techniques, and client advocacy. Among these sessions, several stood out for their innovative approaches and practical guidance that attendees could immediately apply to their practices.
The Power of Language in Settlements: “Magic Words to Use” for Maximum Value
Amber Hall’s session on effective communication during settlements was a highlight of the summit. Her presentation underscored the importance of precise and impactful language when negotiating with defense attorneys. Amber provided strategies to counter common defense arguments, such as when attorneys claim that the client had pre-existing injuries. Her response? Emphasize that justice is not reserved for perfect specimens of health; clients with prior conditions are equally deserving of full justice.
Another common defense tactic is to downplay the severity of the crash by labeling it as a “low impact” event. Amber recommended countering this by highlighting the significant force involved even in seemingly minor collisions, noting that a typical compact car weighs around 3,000 pounds—far beyond what the human body is designed to endure.
Amber also emphasized the power of evolving language to fully represent the extent of your client’s experience. For instance, she advised consistently referring to an “accident” as a “crash,” which conveys a stronger sense of impact and responsibility. Similarly, instead of saying a vehicle was “rear-ended,” consider stating it was “crashed into from behind.” This shift in terminology can make a significant difference in how a case is perceived.
Crafting the Master Complaint: Who to Sue and Why in Trucking Cases
Christy Childers of Childers & McCain delivered an eye-opening session on the intricacies of filing lawsuits in trucking cases. She urged attorneys to look beyond the “usual suspects” when identifying potential defendants. Depending on the case context, it might be strategic to include additional parties, such as:
- The Shipper: If items were not properly secured, the shipper could be held liable.
- The Receiver: In cases where the receiver failed to provide adequate safety instructions or specifications, they could also bear responsibility.
- The Manufacturer: If the case involves hazardous materials, the manufacturer of those goods might be included as a defendant.
- Trailer Owner: In instances where the trailer is owned by a different entity than the truck, there might be a separate policy that could be leveraged in the lawsuit.
- Trailer Manufacturer: If there was a design defect or manufacturing issue, this entity could also be a key player in the lawsuit.
- Maintenance Company: Poor maintenance work that contributed to the accident could make the maintenance company a viable defendant.
This session was a valuable reminder of the importance of thorough case analysis to ensure all potential defendants are considered, thereby maximizing the chances of a successful outcome.
Selecting the Right Jury for Commercial Trucking Cases
The session led by Doug Beam and Travis Mohler focused on the critical task of jury selection in commercial trucking cases. The speakers stressed the importance of understanding the mechanics of jury selection in your specific jurisdiction, such as the number of prospective jurors, seating arrangements, and how stricken jurors will be replaced.
They also emphasized the importance of local expertise—having someone who knows the judge’s preferences can be invaluable. Beam and Mohler advised against fighting to keep jurors who are clearly biased in favor of your side, as this can backfire and damage your credibility with the jury. Instead, focus on establishing a rapport with potential jurors and assessing their openness to awarding significant damages if the evidence supports it.
One of the most strategic pieces of advice was to use voir dire to introduce the concept of high damages early on, especially in jurisdictions where asking for specific damages during the trial is not permitted. For example, asking if anyone would be unable to award $500 million, regardless of the evidence, sets a high anchor point. In closing arguments, you can then remind the jury of their earlier willingness to award significant damages if justified by the evidence.
Final Thoughts
The National Trial Lawyers’ Truck & Auto Accident Summit was a remarkable opportunity for our team to deepen our knowledge and refine our strategies for handling these challenging cases. From learning the nuances of powerful settlement language to identifying the full spectrum of liable parties in trucking cases, and mastering the art of jury selection, the insights we gained will undoubtedly enhance our ability to achieve the best possible outcomes for our clients.
As we continue to integrate these strategies into our practice, we are excited to see how they will help us better serve our clients in truck and auto accident cases. We look forward to applying these new techniques and sharing our success stories in the future.