Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

CatWoman

(79,294 posts)
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 07:54 AM Jul 2014

Tracy Morgan Sues Wal-Mart for Crash That Killed 1

Tracy Morgan has sued Wal-Mart over last month's highway crash that seriously injured him and killed a fellow comedian.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in New Jersey, claims Wal-Mart was negligent when a driver of one of its tractor-trailers rammed into Morgan's limousine van. The complaint claims the retail giant should have known the driver had been awake for over 24 hours, and that his commute of 700 miles from his home in Georgia to work in Delaware was "unreasonable." It also alleges the driver fell asleep at the wheel.

"As a result of Wal-Mart's gross, reckless, willful, wanton, and intentional conduct, it should be appropriately punished with the imposition of punitive damages," according to the complaint.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/tracy-morgan-sues-wal-mart-crash-killed-24533320

15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Tracy Morgan Sues Wal-Mart for Crash That Killed 1 (Original Post) CatWoman Jul 2014 OP
Good malaise Jul 2014 #1
for some reason onethatcares Jul 2014 #2
I think that's what they would normally do if a celebrity wasn't involved. Shoulders of Giants Jul 2014 #5
+1 daleanime Jul 2014 #8
The driver was a Walmart Transportation employee. Ikonoklast Jul 2014 #9
An inconvenient truth JJChambers Jul 2014 #11
Another truth is that Walmart had no reasonable way of knowing if the driver Ikonoklast Jul 2014 #13
Seams premature to me. He doesn't know yet how big the hospital + bills will be. Shrike47 Jul 2014 #3
What part about "killed one person" is premature? TBF Jul 2014 #4
Punitive damages would not be tied to medical expenses. bluedigger Jul 2014 #7
Go get 'em! Sorry to here about Morgan's friend. AllyCat Jul 2014 #6
This lawsuit will be settled soon Gothmog Jul 2014 #10
The Ugly Truth of Trucking CatWoman Jul 2014 #12
I hope he sues the Walton family individually as well maxrandb Jul 2014 #14
The Insulation of Incorporation ProfessorGAC Jul 2014 #15

onethatcares

(16,165 posts)
2. for some reason
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 08:26 AM
Jul 2014

I picture the walmart folks pinning this all on the driver and claiming he was an independent contractor with his own insurance etc.

they'll use the "we have no control over what independent contractors do during the time they aren't working directly for us" ruse.

5. I think that's what they would normally do if a celebrity wasn't involved.
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:46 AM
Jul 2014

However, this time, i think they will run the numbers and decide its better to just admit the guilt and pay up to avoid more bad press, which would be more costly than whatever the settlement will be in this case. Not that the reasoning is any better, but that's what I'm expecting. If it was you or me in the same situation though, forget it.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
9. The driver was a Walmart Transportation employee.
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 11:25 AM
Jul 2014

It was still entirely the driver's fault, he was speeding in a construction zone. There is no reasonable way for any employer to prevent that from happening.

Walmart tries to eliminate the problem drivers by not hiring any to begin with, their qualification standards for new hires are very high.


Walmart Transportation operates one of the safest trucking fleets in all of North America. Their SAFER stats are excellent, most trucking companies would love to have their rating.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
13. Another truth is that Walmart had no reasonable way of knowing if the driver
Mon Jul 14, 2014, 01:32 PM
Jul 2014

got the mandated ten-hour rest break previous to going on duty. Trucking companies will take a driver at his word that they are properly rested before going On Duty. It is also legally the responsibility of the driver to report otherwise.

"Off Duty" means exactly that, the employer is not responsible for any actions taken by an employee while not under the direct supervision of dispatch, such as parking the CMV at a terminal and going home, i.e., "Off Duty".

If the driver did not get proper rest while on Off Duty status, there is no practical way for his employer to know that. It is entirely the driver's responsibility to get proper rest and report as being not being available to work due to not getting the required ten hours rest before reporting to work and resuming On Duty

If he drove from his home in Georgia to the terminal in Delaware, it is was the driver's responsibility to ensure that he got enough sleep before getting behind the wheel of that tractor. This is not something that is vague or not commonly known by a CMV driver, it is actually a Federal regulation well known by anyone in the industry.


Walmart has already stated that they would take full responsibility if it was found that their equipment failing was the cause of the crash.

If the driver lied about his rest time and availability to work, the bulk of any liability for the crash will fall on his shoulders.

Shrike47

(6,913 posts)
3. Seams premature to me. He doesn't know yet how big the hospital + bills will be.
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 08:42 AM
Jul 2014

Their liability is pretty clear, though.

bluedigger

(17,086 posts)
7. Punitive damages would not be tied to medical expenses.
Sat Jul 12, 2014, 10:19 AM
Jul 2014

I doubt this is really about the money for Mr. Morgan in the first place.

maxrandb

(15,310 posts)
14. I hope he sues the Walton family individually as well
Mon Jul 14, 2014, 02:58 PM
Jul 2014

since the Supreme Court just drove a truck through the corporate veil, I think it's time to start holding individuals liable for the things their "personhood" corporation does.

ProfessorGAC

(64,951 posts)
15. The Insulation of Incorporation
Mon Jul 14, 2014, 03:09 PM
Jul 2014

That avoidance of liability is one of the critical reasons people incorporate in the first place.

As bad as i feel for the family of the injured parties, what you suggest just isn't going to occur. It would be summarily dismissed because there are tens of thousands of points of precedence.

In this case, i wish they could be held liable, but at the same time, that would be a bad precedent, because now every small business owner could lose everything if one of their workers did something negligent, and since they're much, much smaller, it wouldn't requrie causing a fatality to bankrupt them personally.

The protections of corporation mean a great deal more to the average business owner than to gazllionaires who were the heirs to a megacorp.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Tracy Morgan Sues Wal-Mar...