Maricopa, CA — December 15, 2025, Felipe Lopez was killed due to a pedestrian versus truck accident shortly before 4:30 a.m. along State Highway 166.
According to authorities, five people—36-year-old Felipe Lopez and four passengers—were traveling in a westbound Honda Civic on S.H. 166 in the vicinity of the Hudson Ranch Road intersection when the Civic apparently struck a curb and an embankment after swerving to avoid a collision with stopped traffic ahead, causing it to come to a halt. Lopez then exited the Civic, according to reports, in order to inspect the vehicle for damage.
It was when Lopez was allegedly attempting to re-enter the Honda that he was struck by an 18-wheeler that had been traveling westbound on the highway. What’s more, after coming to a stop, the truck allegedly entered reverse and struck Lopez a second time. He reportedly did not survive the incident.
Additional details pertaining to this accident are not available at this point in time. The investigation is currently ongoing.
Commentary by Attorney Michael Grossman
When a person survives an initial incident on the highway—only to be struck and killed while trying to inspect or re-enter their vehicle—the tragedy isn’t just about being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It’s about a sequence of decisions and missed cues that made an already hazardous situation worse. And when an 18-wheeler is involved—especially one that allegedly reversed over the victim after the initial impact—the burden falls heavily on the truck driver and the investigation to determine how this was allowed to happen at all.
According to reports, Felipe Lopez exited his vehicle after it came to an abrupt stop due to avoiding traffic. That already puts him in a dangerous position—outside a disabled vehicle on a dark stretch of highway in the pre-dawn hours. But drivers of commercial trucks are trained specifically to anticipate those kinds of hazards. A stopped or disabled car along the shoulder—especially with passengers present—should trigger heightened caution. That means slowing down, scanning carefully, and maintaining awareness of pedestrians who may be outside their vehicles.
If the truck driver struck Lopez while he was trying to re-enter the Civic, the legal question becomes: Was Lopez visible, and should the driver have seen him? Was the truck traveling too fast for conditions? Was the driver distracted or fatigued at that hour? These aren’t hypothetical concerns—they’re factual questions that ECM data, dash cam footage, and post-crash inspection records can help answer.
The allegation that the truck then reversed and hit Lopez a second time raises an entirely separate set of concerns. Reversing a semi-truck on a highway is rare and generally discouraged unless absolutely necessary—and even then, it must be done with extreme care. If the driver wasn’t aware that a person had been struck, that speaks to a possible breakdown in situational awareness. If the driver was aware and reversed anyway, it raises even more serious questions about judgment and protocol.
Ultimately, this is not a simple pedestrian-versus-truck case. It’s a multi-stage incident involving a disabled vehicle, nighttime visibility, and a second, preventable point of contact. Determining where liability falls—and whether it rests with the driver alone or extends to the trucking company—will depend on what the evidence shows about visibility, speed, and decision-making in those critical moments.
Key Takeaways:
- Lopez was outside his vehicle after a roadway emergency when he was struck—placing a heightened duty on the truck driver to scan for pedestrians.
- The first impact raises questions about speed, attentiveness, and whether the driver had enough time to see and avoid Lopez.
- The reported second impact, caused by the truck reversing, suggests a possible failure to confirm the scene was clear before backing.
- ECM data, dash cam footage, and visibility conditions at the time will be central to determining how preventable this fatality was.
- The truck driver’s conduct—and possibly company safety procedures—will be under scrutiny as the investigation develops.
call us 
Email Us 
Text us