PHILADELPHIA – A case surrounding a fatal tractor-trailer crash in Bucks County which had been headed to trial in a Philadelphia federal court this week, was instead settled before a ruling governing the admission of key seatbelt evidence at trial could be made.
Lillian P. Villagran (as the Administratrix of the Estate of Eryk Sanchinelli) of Mount Vernon, Wash. first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on June 2, 2022 versus Freightbull, Inc. of Lyons, Ill., Voyd Watkins of Dallas, Texas and John Does I-III.
“On Dec. 28, 2020, defendant Watkins was operating the tractor-trailer. Defendants Freightbull, Inc. and/or Does I-III hired, trained, and retained defendant Watkins, contracted and/or agreed that defendant Watkins would haul a load of goods in the tractor-trailer subject to defendants’ Freightbull, Inc.’s and/or Does I-III’s control. As a commercially licensed driver operating the tractor-trailer for defendants Freightbull, Inc. and/or Does I-III, which is a licensed Federal Motor Carrier required to comply with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, defendants were required to be familiar with the applicable federal and state regulations,” the suit said.
“Defendants knew that failure to comply with the applicable federal and state regulations while operating the tractor-trailer could cause death or serious injury to himself or others on the road, including occupants of other vehicles. Despite his training, knowledge, and awareness of the dangerous consequences of his actions, defendant Watkins repeatedly violated the rules of the road as well as the applicable regulations, statute, and standards (including FMCSA regulations) and practices of commercial truck drivers. In the afternoon and evening hours of Dec. 28, 2020, prior to the crash described herein, defendant Watkins was stopped at a truck stop on the southbound side of Route 309 located at 1730 Route 309, Springfield Township, Bucks County, PA. Defendant Watkins stopped at the aforementioned truck stop along the southbound lanes of Route 309 despite his intention to travel North on Route 309 when he left the truck stop that night.”
The suit added that on Dec. 28, 2020 at approximately 9:50 p.m., defendant Watkins was operating the tractor-trailer when he attempted to exit the truck stop by crossing in front of two southbound lanes of traffic on Route 309 so that he could turn left onto one of the two northbound lanes of Route 309 – and that due to the traffic conditions at the time, defendant Watkins pulled halfway out across the roadway, blocking the southbound lanes, and stopped to allow vehicles travelling in the northbound lane to pass before he could complete his turn.
“Due to the size and weight of the tractor-trailer, defendant Watkins slowly began moving from that stopped position blocking the southbound lanes to continue his turn onto the northbound lane of Route 309. On Dec. 28, 2020, at approximately 9:50 p.m., in the area of the crash, it was dark outside, the road for the southbound travelers slightly curves, and there is vegetation and signage along the southbound lanes of the highway approaching the truck stop exit. The tractor-trailer was not properly illuminated on the sides to allow for oncoming traffic in the southbound lanes to react to this obstacle in their path. The speed limit on this section of Route 309 where the crash occurred is 55 miles per hour. There is no traffic control device at the exit of the truck stop onto Route 309,” the suit stated.
“At the time of the crash, the decedent was the driver of a 2010 silver Honda CRV in the southbound lane of Route 309 in Springfield Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania. In the moments before the crash, the decedent was driving in the left southbound lane of Route 309, while other vehicles were travelling essentially alongside him in the right lane of southbound Route 309. On or about Dec. 28, 2020, at approximately 9:50 p.m., the decedent’s vehicle collided into the box truck of the tractor-trailer operated by defendant Watkins that was across the southbound lanes of travel. As a result of the crash, the decedent suffered fatal injuries. At all times relevant, and under the circumstances then existing, the decedent acted in a careful and reasonable manner, and did not contribute to the happening of the crash.”
Settlement Negotiated Ahead of Trial, Admissibility of Seatbelt Evidence Declared Moot
On May 29 and in advance of trial, the plaintiff filed a motion in limine to preclude the introduction of any testimony, reference, argument or evidence as to whether the decedent was wearing a seatbelt.
According to Pennsylvania State Trooper Justin Hood’s police report and deposition, it was disclosed that, at the time of the crash, the decedent was not wearing a seatbelt and defendant Watkins was wearing a lap and shoulder belt.
However, the plaintiff’s motion argued this evidence is both irrelevant and precluded by Pennsylvania state law.
But before the seatbelt evidence issue could be ruled upon and prior to trial, it was noted to the Court on May 31 in a letter from plaintiff counsel that the case had tentatively been settled. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
“We represent plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. We are pleased to report that this matter, scheduled to begin trial on Monday, June 3, 2024, has settled pending Court approval. The parties respectfully request that Your Honor retain jurisdiction of the matter, and that the case not be closed at this time, to allow the petition for approval of the settlement of the wrongful death claim to be filed,” the letter stated.
Three days later, on June 3, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Gerald A. McHugh ruled, in light of the settlement, that both the plaintiff’s and defendants’ motions in limine were denied as moot.
Issue of Seatbelt Wear in Crashes Has Also Arisen in Georgia Courts
In a Georgia case related to a 2020 crash where a woman’s airbag didn’t deploy and she hit her head on the windshield, the plaintiff then sued Ford – which planned to counter the suit with the argument that she was not wearing her seatbelt.
Citing federal guidance, the company pointed out that air bags are considered “supplemental protection and are designed to work best in combination with seatbelts.” Georgia requires the use of seatbelts by front-seat passengers.
But the Supreme Court of Georgia wouldn’t let Ford mention whether or not the injured plaintiff was wearing a seatbelt. Now, Republican-led legislation in the state would give automakers the right to point out when a car-crash plaintiff wasn’t wearing their seatbelt, a bill which passed unanimously in the state Senate, 52-0.
The legislation, sponsored by Georgia Republican State Senators Brandon Beach, Greg Dolezal, Shawn Still and Steve Gooch, along with Georgia Republican Rep. Clay Pirkle, has not yet come up for a vote in the Georgia House of Representatives. Rather, a substitute bill has only been favorably reported by a House committee since then.
The plaintiff was represented by Susan B. Ayres and Leonard K. Hill of Hill & Associates, in Philadelphia.
The defendants were represented by John M. Campbell and Donald I. Wall of Cipriani & Werner, in Blue Bell.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:22-cv-02159
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com