How can the insurance coverage business assist curb trucking lawsuits?

US trucking companies face a worsening litigation panorama, as jury awards and settlement quantities for trucking litigation have exploded during the last decade.

In a brand new examine analyzing the long-term development, the US Chamber Institute for Authorized Reform (ILR) known as for a “multi-pronged” method, involving numerous stakeholders, to sort out rising litigation dangers for the trucking business.

The insurance coverage business, which should soak up the mounting prices of claims from these lawsuits, also can play a task, the authorized reform group mentioned.

“Trucking litigation is evolving in an unhealthy method,” mentioned Nathan Morris (pictured under), senior vp, authorized reform advocacy at ILR. “The variety of claims and the price of resolving these claims are each growing steadily over time.”

ILR’s examine exhibits that the common dimension of verdicts towards trucking companies surged 867% between 2010 and 2018. Between June 2020 and April 2023, the common award in trucking lawsuits was $27.5 million, whereas the common settlement was $10 million.

A overwhelming majority of the US trucking business is comprised of small companies, which usually tend to be crippled by the bills stemming from litigation. About 96% of all carriers function 10 or fewer vehicles, in accordance with knowledge from the American Trucking Associations.

“There’s a option to tackle it that’s cheap and truthful that can curb abuses and excesses and convey prices again down, which is sweet not just for carriers but additionally shoppers, as a result of trucking verdicts are handed on to everybody,” Morris mentioned.

Nuclear verdicts – a vicious cycle?

ILR’s evaluation discovered that auto accidents made up practically 1 / 4 (22.8%) of non-public harm and wrongful loss of life circumstances with nuclear verdicts – awards of $10 million or extra – between 2010 and 2019. Inside that class, about one in 4 circumstances concerned a trucking firm.

Moreover, the variety of circumstances with verdicts over $1 million surged 235% from 2012-2019, in comparison with 2005-2011.

The worst states to function or drive a truck in the case of litigation threat had been Florida, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Texas, and Georgia, ILR discovered.

Morris pointed to the “troubling development” of disproportionate verdict quantities being fueled by earlier profitable circumstances.

“Whenever you have a look at how trial attorneys function, they’ve a view that success begets success. It is common to see extra money go into promoting and extra circumstances be filed after massive verdicts [are awarded],” he mentioned.

“Trucking litigation, in some methods, is a vicious cycle as a result of the place bigger numbers [of cases] being reported attracts extra consideration and attracts extra circumstances.”

Authorized ways in trucking circumstances driving up verdicts

ILR additionally recognized a number of authorized ways which might be serving to plaintiffs pull in greater verdicts:

• Medical referral networks and inflated billing practices
• “Reptile” courtroom ways by plaintiff’s attorneys
• A widening circle of defendants to succeed in deeper pockets
• An ambiguous and exploitable customary of look after trucking operations

“The only issue that is inflicting the rise in verdict sizes is the ways,” mentioned Morris. “There is a matter with how medical damages are being introduced to juries, and with how trial attorneys are arguing their circumstances to juries to set off security responses, known as ‘reptile’ idea.”

The “reptile idea” is a psychological tactic that instills worry in jurors to make them consider the one method they’ll hold their family members and communities secure is to award huge damages to the plaintiff. The time period, described in a 2009 e-book by David Ball and Don Keenan, has been blamed for the rise in nuclear verdicts throughout completely different sectors.

Morris additionally pointed to aggressive modifications in litigation patterns, together with turning to bigger freight brokers and shippers as a supply of restoration.

“There’s much more motion now, if freight brokers and shippers are being sued along with the precise motor service,” Morris continued. “Exterior litigation, there’s the problem of promoting. What kind of claims are represented to the general public?

“There is a comparatively new and quickly rising business of third-party litigation funders who’re investing their cash in lawsuits, together with trucking lawsuits. Having that exterior funding has modified the dynamic of litigation in unhealthy methods.”

What’s the insurance coverage business’s position in curbing trucking litigations?

Inflated verdicts and settlements have had an hostile influence on the insurance coverage market, driving greater charges for trucking legal responsibility insurance coverage and reducing the provision of choices for protection.

Insurers are within the frontlines of the authorized battles and may undertake a number of methods to assist curb verdicts, Morris defined.

“Insurers are defending lots of these circumstances. In that position, insurers have an opportunity to make a distinction in how the circumstances play out,” he mentioned.

“For instance, they could possibly be aggressively requesting data on the financing of lawsuits to determine whether or not there’s a funder concerned and whether or not that is altering the way in which the case is being prosecuted.”

Insurers also can encourage their protection counsel to be looking out for “reptile” ways and different litigation instruments within the courtroom.

“I feel many carriers are working these circumstances very aggressively and trying to supply most protection to their insureds,” Morris mentioned. “However these are tendencies they have to control.”

Share your ideas on trucking litigation threat and nuclear verdicts within the feedback under.