These great attorneys took care of all the legal representation and did a phenomenal job. I would recommend them to anyone seeking excellent attorneys! 
-
C. Mossier
Mother of a Wrongful Death Victim
Dallas Flatbed Trailer Accident Lawyer
Were You Hurt in a Dallas Flatbed Trailer Accident? Discuss Your Case With Our Dallas Attorneys
The city of Dallas and its surrounding highways see the frequent transportation of goods on flatbed trailers. Flatbed trailers are typically used to transport cargo that is too large to fit inside a cargo container. These trucks differ from typical 18 wheelers because the flatbed is actually mounted to the chassis of the truck and cannot be removed. This makes maneuvering these vehicles (and maneuvering around them) very different.
Furthermore, the cargo these flatbeds transport is often knocked loose in an accident, which makes these accidents even more dangerous than a typical 18 wheeler wreck.
There are often several defendants in cases involving this kind of accident. Naturally, the truck driver and his or her insurance policy will be partly liable. If the cargo was improperly secured, the company that loaded the trailer may also be at fault. Sometimes the equipment that secured the cargo is defective, making the manufacturers a likely defendant as well.
If the cargo fell as a result of a crash with another driver, that driver may be partly liable. If, on the other hand, the truck driver collided with an overpass, power line, or some other permanent obstacle on the road, then the organization that planned the route might also be to blame.
The attorneys at Grossman Law Offices have twenty years of experience in navigating this sort of legal complexity. Our aggressive lawyers can help you seek medical treatment, file insurance paperwork, seek the compensation you are owed, and fight for your rights in court. Contact the Dallas flatbed trailer accident lawyers at Grossman Law Offices and let us help you bring those responsible for your accident to justice.
Related articles:
Questions answered by this article:
Is the truck driver and his company always responsible?How do I sue the truck driver that hit me?
How do I file a personal injury claim against the trucking company?
Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases
Confidential Recovery - Wrongful Death / Commercial Vehicle Accident
(policy limits) Our firm was hired by the wife and children of a retired Army Colonel who was killed in an underide 18-wheeler accident. In addition to being a decorated veteran, the decedent worked both professionally and on a voluntary basis to establish numerous learning institutions and vocational programs for at risk youths. The accident occurred as the decedent was traveling on a rural highway when an 18-wheeler failed to yield the right of way and made a rolling stop through a stop sign.
This placed the trailer of the 18-wheeler in a position whereby it blocked the entire roadway and shoulder, leaving the decedent no option but to collide with the trailer. Witnesses on the scene attempted to revive him but to no avail. Furthermore, while two female eye witnesses struggled to pry open the decedent's door to provide emergency care, the truck driver stayed in his truck and offered no assistance. Despite what appeared to be an incredibly apparent case of negligence on behalf of the defendant, defense counsel refused to accept liability resulting in rather lengthy litigation.
The defendants initially denied the claim based on the allegation that the decedent was speeding and the truck driver therefore could not adequately gauge the amount of time he had to pause at the stop sign. The physical evidence contradicted this notion entirely, notwithstanding the fact that even if the decedent had been contributorily negligent, that would not have outweighed the severe degree of negligence on the part of the defendant. Nevertheless, our attorneys were able to conclusively refute this argument based on eye-witness testimony and the testimony from police investigators who calculated the decedent's speed to be precisely at the posted speed limit. In a desperate and largely unprecedented move, the defendants then designated the state as a responsible third party.
Generally speaking, a defendant will often threaten to designate a third party in order to leverage their position but it is rare that such an arbitrary and arguably frivolous designation is actually carried out. However, that is precisely what occurred and the state was thusly incorporated into the lawsuit by the defendants. The basis of the defendant's argument was that the state erected a large street sign that obstructed the truck driver's view of approaching traffic.
Several months of intense litigation were required to before the defendant finally acquiesced in regard to this argument. The argument was finally abandoned by the defendants when in the first mediation our attorneys presented video footage shot (in a controlled setting) from the perspective of an 18-wheeler driver which showed that the sign simply did not obstruct enough of the roadway in order to be a hazard. The case was ultimately resolved through litigation.
(policy limits) Our firm was hired by the wife and children of a retired Army Colonel who was killed in an underide 18-wheeler accident. In addition to being a decorated veteran, the decedent worked both professionally and on a voluntary basis to establish numerous learning institutions and vocational programs for at risk youths. The accident occurred as the decedent was traveling on a rural highway when an 18-wheeler failed to yield the right of way and made a rolling stop through a stop sign.
This placed the trailer of the 18-wheeler in a position whereby it blocked the entire roadway and shoulder, leaving the decedent no option but to collide with the trailer. Witnesses on the scene attempted to revive him but to no avail. Furthermore, while two female eye witnesses struggled to pry open the decedent's door to provide emergency care, the truck driver stayed in his truck and offered no assistance. Despite what appeared to be an incredibly apparent case of negligence on behalf of the defendant, defense counsel refused to accept liability resulting in rather lengthy litigation.
The defendants initially denied the claim based on the allegation that the decedent was speeding and the truck driver therefore could not adequately gauge the amount of time he had to pause at the stop sign. The physical evidence contradicted this notion entirely, notwithstanding the fact that even if the decedent had been contributorily negligent, that would not have outweighed the severe degree of negligence on the part of the defendant. Nevertheless, our attorneys were able to conclusively refute this argument based on eye-witness testimony and the testimony from police investigators who calculated the decedent's speed to be precisely at the posted speed limit. In a desperate and largely unprecedented move, the defendants then designated the state as a responsible third party.
Generally speaking, a defendant will often threaten to designate a third party in order to leverage their position but it is rare that such an arbitrary and arguably frivolous designation is actually carried out. However, that is precisely what occurred and the state was thusly incorporated into the lawsuit by the defendants. The basis of the defendant's argument was that the state erected a large street sign that obstructed the truck driver's view of approaching traffic.
Several months of intense litigation were required to before the defendant finally acquiesced in regard to this argument. The argument was finally abandoned by the defendants when in the first mediation our attorneys presented video footage shot (in a controlled setting) from the perspective of an 18-wheeler driver which showed that the sign simply did not obstruct enough of the roadway in order to be a hazard. The case was ultimately resolved through litigation.
Total Recovery:
Confidential
Confidential
Attorney Fees:
Confidential
Confidential
Litigation Expenses:
Confidential
Confidential
$530,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Plaintiff, a delivery driver, suffered a back injury resulting in spinal fusion surgery when he was injured in an accident involving falling cargo from an 18-wheeler. The defendants cited the plaintiff's failure to take evasive action as a source of contributory negligence and litigation commenced accordingly which culminated in an acceptance of liability and eventually satisfactory resolution.
Plaintiff, a delivery driver, suffered a back injury resulting in spinal fusion surgery when he was injured in an accident involving falling cargo from an 18-wheeler. The defendants cited the plaintiff's failure to take evasive action as a source of contributory negligence and litigation commenced accordingly which culminated in an acceptance of liability and eventually satisfactory resolution.
Total Recovery:
$530,000.00
$530,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$210,000.00
$210,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$90,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries and Leg Contusions)
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue back injuries and leg contusions in an 18-wheeler accident.
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue back injuries and leg contusions in an 18-wheeler accident.
Total Recovery:
$90,000.00
$90,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$562.00
$562.00
$200,000.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Closed Head Injury)
Recovered for car accident victim who suffered a closed head injury.
Recovered for car accident victim who suffered a closed head injury.
Total Recovery:
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$66,666.00
$66,666.00
Litigation Expenses:
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
$75,000.00 Recovery - Workplace Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
Total Recovery:
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$350.00
$350.00
$875,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Plaintiff suffered a back injury resulting in spinal fusion surgery when her car was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler. The defendants argued that the accident was unavoidable, thus denying liability. Litigation commenced and the case was satisfactorily resolved soon thereafter.
Plaintiff suffered a back injury resulting in spinal fusion surgery when her car was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler. The defendants argued that the accident was unavoidable, thus denying liability. Litigation commenced and the case was satisfactorily resolved soon thereafter.
Total Recovery:
$875,000.00
$875,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$288,750.00
$288,750.00
Litigation Expenses:
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
$335,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death/ Commercial Vehicle Accident
The mother of a young man hired our firm to investigate the death of her son following a fatal car accident. The incident occurred as one of the two vehicles involved ran a red light and drive into the path of the other. The defendant was driving a work vehicle for a construction company. The defendant survived the accident and stated to police that the decedent caused the accident. The police could not conclusively determine who was at fault, yet the police report strongly implied that the decedent was likely at fault based on the statement provided by the defendant.
The plaintiff's mother was not convinced. Through a thorough investigation, we ultimately determined that the stoplight that the defendant claimed that our client ran, in fact, worked on a timer whereby the light was always green between certain hours unless a vehicle traveling on the intersecting road had been stopped at the right light for more than 30 seconds. Based on an analysis of the vehicles and tire markings, it was conclusively determined that both vehicles were traveling at the speed limit, which clearly indicates that the defendant driver had not accelerated from stop, rather, he was traveling at the speed limit, which would not have triggered a green light for the defendant.
The logical implications of this information is that the light could not have been red for the plaintiff, and it certainly would have been red for the defendant. As a consequence of this information, the case was resolved through litigation.
The mother of a young man hired our firm to investigate the death of her son following a fatal car accident. The incident occurred as one of the two vehicles involved ran a red light and drive into the path of the other. The defendant was driving a work vehicle for a construction company. The defendant survived the accident and stated to police that the decedent caused the accident. The police could not conclusively determine who was at fault, yet the police report strongly implied that the decedent was likely at fault based on the statement provided by the defendant.
The plaintiff's mother was not convinced. Through a thorough investigation, we ultimately determined that the stoplight that the defendant claimed that our client ran, in fact, worked on a timer whereby the light was always green between certain hours unless a vehicle traveling on the intersecting road had been stopped at the right light for more than 30 seconds. Based on an analysis of the vehicles and tire markings, it was conclusively determined that both vehicles were traveling at the speed limit, which clearly indicates that the defendant driver had not accelerated from stop, rather, he was traveling at the speed limit, which would not have triggered a green light for the defendant.
The logical implications of this information is that the light could not have been red for the plaintiff, and it certainly would have been red for the defendant. As a consequence of this information, the case was resolved through litigation.
Total Recovery:
$335,000.00
$335,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$134,000.00
$134,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$63,000.00
$63,000.00
$40,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue damage which required physical therapy after being rear ended by a commercial vehicle.
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue damage which required physical therapy after being rear ended by a commercial vehicle.
Total Recovery:
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$13,333.00
$13,333.00
Litigation Expenses:
$50.00
$50.00
$41,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovered for client suffered soft-tissue injuries when her car was side-swiped by a dump truck.
Recovered for client suffered soft-tissue injuries when her car was side-swiped by a dump truck.
Total Recovery:
$41,000.00
$41,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$13,666.00
$13,666.00
Litigation Expenses:
$50.00
$50.00
$187,500.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Our firm was hired by a young woman who was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler when she slowed for traffic in a construction zone. Initially, she attempted to represent herself and the insurance carrier offered roughly $1,000 to settle her case. She then contacted our firm and we filed suit soon after our initial investigation. The case was successfully resolved in litigation.
Our firm was hired by a young woman who was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler when she slowed for traffic in a construction zone. Initially, she attempted to represent herself and the insurance carrier offered roughly $1,000 to settle her case. She then contacted our firm and we filed suit soon after our initial investigation. The case was successfully resolved in litigation.
Total Recovery:
$187,500.00
$187,500.00
Attorney Fees:
$61,875.00
$61,875.00
Litigation Expenses:
$2,500.00
$2,500.00