Texas Supreme Court to Hear Werner Enterprises $100M Nuclear Verdict Appeal

The highly anticipated appeal of a nuclear verdict against Werner Enterprises, one of the largest trucking companies in the U.S., now goes to the Texas Supreme Court. This nuclear verdict, stemming from a tragic 2014 accident, raises concerns about liability in the trucking industry and could reshape how responsibility gets assigned in accidents involving commercial vehicles.

With the trucking industry, insurance companies, and legal experts closely monitoring the case, the Texas Supreme Court’s decision could redefine how nuclear verdicts affect the future of trucking litigation.

Background of the Werner Enterprises Case

The case began with a fatal crash on December 14, 2014, on Interstate 20 in Odessa, Texas. That day, the National Weather Service issued a winter storm warning, alerting drivers about hazardous conditions due to freezing rain and icy roads. Trey Salinas drove eastbound in a pickup truck with Jennifer Blake and her three children. When the truck hit a patch of black ice, it lost control and spun across a 42-foot grassy median into the westbound lane, where Shiraz Ali, a Werner Enterprises truck driver, approached in an 18-wheeler.

Ali, driving below the speed limit with full control of his vehicle, immediately applied the brakes but couldn’t avoid a collision with the out-of-control pickup truck. The impact resulted in the death of one child, left another paralyzed, and caused severe injuries to the other family members.

In July 2018, a jury awarded nearly $90 million in damages to the Blake family, finding Werner and Ali liable. The jury assigned 70% of the fault to Werner Enterprises and 14% to Ali, while Salinas held 16%. Werner owes nearly $92 million after interest, while Ali owes $13 million. The nuclear verdict has generated controversy within the trucking industry, with experts questioning how Ali, who stayed in his lane and acted appropriately, could be held responsible.

The Case for Werner Enterprises and Shiraz Ali

The trucking industry and its insurers have voiced significant concerns about this nuclear verdict. The key issue centers on whether Ali should have reasonably anticipated that the Blake family’s vehicle might lose control and cross into his lane. Werner Enterprises argues that Ali maintained full control of his vehicle and responded swiftly when faced with an unexpected emergency—a point supported by witnesses and law enforcement.

Law enforcement also defended Ali’s actions. A Texas Department of Public Safety trooper determined that Ali did nothing wrong and could not have avoided the crash. The westbound lanes, where Ali was driving, were not icy like the eastbound lanes, making his continued driving reasonable. Even the Blakes’ own expert testified that Ali’s reaction to the situation was quick and appropriate.

Werner’s legal team also challenged the jury’s apportionment of fault. They argued that the 70% liability assigned to Werner didn’t align with the facts of the case. This challenge has become central to Werner’s appeal, as the company maintains that Ali followed company policy and federal guidelines.

Opposition to the Nuclear Verdict

The nuclear verdict against Werner Enterprises has drawn sharp criticism from within the trucking industry. Many fear that if upheld, this nuclear verdict could set a precedent where commercial drivers and their employers face liability for accidents caused by other factors beyond their control. Industry experts worry that this decision might make it easier to hold truck drivers responsible for crashes caused by other motorists who lose control of their vehicles.

Supporters of Werner’s appeal have pointed out several issues in the trial:

  • Ali was driving in a lane deemed safe by the Texas Department of Transportation.
  • Salinas, the driver of the pickup, lost control due to icy conditions, but the court excluded evidence showing he lacked a valid driver’s license.
  • A veteran state trooper cleared Ali of wrongdoing, calling the crash “unavoidable.”

The Texas Court of Appeals upheld the nuclear verdict in May 2023, prompting Werner Enterprises to take the case to the Texas Supreme Court.

Texas Supreme Court’s Review

Werner Enterprises and Shiraz Ali petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to overturn the nuclear verdict. Their key arguments include:

  • Duty of Foreseeability: Werner claims Ali had no duty to anticipate that a vehicle traveling in the opposite direction might lose control and cross into his lane.
  • Proximate Cause: Werner contends that no evidence proves Ali’s actions caused the crash.
  • Derivative Liability: Werner disputes liability theories such as negligent hiring and supervision since the company accepted vicarious liability for Ali’s conduct.
  • Jury Error: Werner’s legal team argues that the jury’s comparative fault findings lack sufficient evidence.

The Texas Supreme Court agreed to review the case, and a hearing is expected in the coming months. If the court rules in Werner’s favor, it could reverse the nuclear verdict and provide much-needed clarity on liability laws for commercial drivers.

Industry-Wide Implications of Nuclear Verdicts

The nuclear verdict in this case could set a significant precedent beyond Werner Enterprises. If the Texas Supreme Court affirms the lower court’s decision, it may increase the liability burden on trucking companies and drivers, even in situations where the fault may not clearly lie with the commercial vehicle.

This nuclear verdict has caused widespread concern across the trucking industry. Many fear that if such verdicts become more common, they will lead to higher insurance premiums, more legal challenges, and rising operational costs for the transportation sector. The case remains a focal point for truckers, insurers, and legal experts, as the Texas Supreme Court’s decision will determine whether Werner and Ali will bear financial responsibility and how nuclear verdicts will influence the future of the industry.

Loading new replies...

Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

Still litigating 10 years later.

Reply Like

Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

@Mike you missed your chance to have the leading image be of a mushroom cloud.

Reply 1 Like

Mike

Well-Known Member

26,684 messages 21,124 likes

That was AI creating that image, and I was trying to get a nuclear explosion in there, it just wouldn't work right.

Reply 1 Like

Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

To be fair, I think this entire original judgement is BS and should not have been allowed to be entered into the record. It makes absolutely no sense.

I don't even like Werner and I applaud their continued fight.

Reply 4 Likes

Mike

Well-Known Member

26,684 messages 21,124 likes

I remember when it was a huge story, and all the debate that went on around it. 10 years ago, and this thing is still alive and now reaching the Texas Supreme Court.

And yes, this was total BS.

If we choose to drive, and end up causing an accident in bad weather, that's on us. That's not what happened here, though.

Reply 4 Likes

Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

I agree. These morons lost control and crossed the median and got themselves unalived as I recall. It's 100% on them.

Werner was just dilly bopping along in their lane.

Reply 4 Likes

Duck

Sarcastic remark goes here

28,869 messages 39,690 likes

Too bad juries can't be punished for such stupidity. They should have to cough up the hundred million dollars themselves.

And the lawyer(s) who brought the case..

He should be charged criminally as if he stole $100M from Werner. And if the verdict is overturned on appeal, his criminal charge can be lowered to "attempted" theft of $100M.

The civil court system in this country needs to be overhauled. Right now it's simply legalized theft. Werner was in no way, shape or form responsible for that crash. In fact, they have legal grounds to sue the estate or insurance company of the actual responsible party for the damage to their truck.

Reply 5 Likes

click to expand...
Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

Ever since I heard about that, I decided to stay home when weather is borderline sketchy.

Reply Like

Mike

Well-Known Member

26,684 messages 21,124 likes

Odd part is that this started out as $80 million. Through the appeals process, it has risen to $100 million.

Reply 2 Likes

Hammer166

Instigateur №166™

4,401 messages 7,492 likes

There's a similar case in ND that's more recent. But same basic argument, even though the trucker did nothing wrong, he should have known better than to be there.

But with the trial lawyers being one of the largest lobbyists groups, tort reform is DOA for the foreseeable future.

Reply 3 Likes

Electric Chicken

Well-Known Member

27,029 messages 23,076 likes

They're literally just being spiteful against Werner.

Reply 1 Like

×