TIDA's Victories & Setbacks Series

One of the biggest benefits of TIDA is learning from the experiences of other TIDA members. That is true when things go well... and when they don’t. For over a decade, the plaintiffs’ bar has coordinated their discovery and trial strategies in an effort to drive up verdicts and settlements in trucking cases. And there is no doubt that their strategy has worked.

In an effort to coordinate the defense, TIDA hosts a series for defense attorneys and trucking claim professionals entitled “Victories & Setbacks” to share information about recent trial results – so that we can all be more effective in defending the trucking industry. Each installment will feature an in-depth discussion about a recent verdict in a trucking case, from a brief recitation of the facts, through discovery challenges, motions practice, voir dire, trial, and verdict. The goal is to give you practical take-aways that you can implement in your own work.

If you have a recent trial result (good or bad) that you would like to share in a future installment of this series, submit your request to be featured here.

Federal Jury in Philadelphia Assigns Plaintiff Significant Fault and Rejects Punitive Damages After 5-Day Trial

Thursday, September 10, 2026
1:00 pm Eastern

In May 2026, attorneys Gary Stewart and Inder Paul of Weber Gallagher obtained a favorable verdict for a well-known motor carrier in federal court in Philadelphia against a nationally known trucking trial attorney.

The accident involved two tractor trailers that collided after the defendant passed through a toll plaza's EZ Pass lanes while the plaintiff was entering the highway from a rest area. ECM data supported allegations that the defendant was speeding and rear ended the plaintiff at 61 mph. Plaintiff initially told the investigating trooper he was going 55 mph, then admitted to 25 to 30 mph.  Snow that blew off the roof of plaintiff's trailer landed on defendant's windshield, effectively blinding him, a detail the trooper corroborated in his report.

Plaintiff's demand stood at $15 million throughout, arguing the defendant driver was 100% at fault and that his conduct was reckless, willful, and wanton. After a five-day trial, the jury found the defendants 55% at fault and the plaintiff 45% at fault and rejected punitive damages against both the driver and the company. Plaintiff's demand dropped sharply thereafter, and the case settled close to the amount offered at mediation.

Join us as Gary shares takeaways and lessons learned from this contentious trial in Philadelphia.

Register today