Safety Managers On Trial – Plaintiff’s Attorneys New Strategy

Est. 4 min read

In recent years, plaintiff’s attorneys have seen increasing success in winning nuclear verdict trials. Between employing reptile theory and arguing that fleets put profits over safety, there are a number of strategies they can use to score a victory for their client.

One strategy that has been identified by legal experts as effective is “putting the safety manager on trial.” In effect, these attorneys turn the crash-involved driver against their fleet and lay the blame on the feet of the safety manager.

What This Looks Like in Practice

As an example, say a new driver ends up in a preventable crash that results in serious injuries to a pedestrian. Plaintiff’s attorneys will argue the driver, too, is a victim, because the fleet set them up to fail. They will often even try to turn the driver against their fleet, using them as a witness to demonstrate their safety manager was the one who set them up to fail.

They will try to show the policies and procedures executed by the safety manager were either improperly followed or insufficient. Even if training was assigned, they may argue that the safety manager should have recognized the amount assigned was inadequate and more was needed. 

In situations like this, plaintiff’s attorneys will call the safety manager to the stand for cross examination, where they will try to make the safety manager’s work appear negligent to the jury.

Why This Strategy Works

The thought process behind this strategy is straightforward and effective: Drivers involved in a serious crash are often incredibly remorseful, and juries are unlikely to assign major damages to a remorseful defendant.

Additionally, this strategy argues that the driver’s actions were a symptom of a larger problem. Not only does this let the plaintiff’s attorneys avoid centering the case around the specifics of the crash at hand, but it also allows them to make the case that the fleet put profits ahead of safety, which—they will argue—can be disincentivized with large punitive damages.

Juries are made up of regular people and are unlikely to believe that a driver who may be traumatized from their crash needs to be further incentivized to take caution moving forward. By going after the fleet, rather than the driver, plaintiff’s attorneys get to attack a faceless corporate entity who they can argue needs to learn a lesson and should be ordered to pay excessive punitive damages.

How to Combat This Strategy

As a disclaimer, the following is not intended to be legal advice. Any decisions made regarding legal activity should be made in consultation with an attorney:

Always treat your driver with respect and care after a crash
Even if a crash was preventable, it was likely not done out of malice. Not only is it the right way to treat someone who experienced a traumatic event, but it can also prevent a plaintiff’s attorney from recruiting them to help their case.

Be open and transparent with your data.
If you are forthcoming with your driver data and policies, it’s harder for the plaintiff’s attorney to portray your fleet as a bad faith actor with something to hide. Additionally, you can use your data to show that the incident in question was truly an unfortunate accident, and not the result of systemic negligence.

Stay in the know

Subscribe to get the latest news and industry insights from Idelic.

You might also like

Insurance Cost Triggers and How to Reduce Them

Insurance Cost Triggers and How to Reduce Them

John Simms, Senior Risk Advisor at HNI, and Jeff Davis, Vice President of Safety at the Hudson Insurance Group, join moderator Hayden Cardiff to discuss what triggers insurance cost increases and how fleets can reduce these costs. Together, they lay out simple actions...

read more
Preventing Nuclear Verdicts: In Court and the Back Office

Preventing Nuclear Verdicts: In Court and the Back Office

What is a Nuclear Verdict?  The information provided in this whitepaper does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice. The term “Nuclear Verdict” doesn’t have a standard definition; it’s used in different ways by different people. Some refer to a nuclear...

read more