When a commercial truck causes a catastrophic accident, the driver behind the wheel is rarely the only party at fault. Trucking companies bear enormous responsibility for the safety of their operations — from hiring qualified drivers and maintaining vehicles to enforcing hours-of-service compliance and ensuring proper cargo securement. When a trucking company cuts corners to save money or increase productivity, innocent people pay the price with devastating injuries and lost lives. McFarlane Law targets the corporate negligence that causes truck accidents, not just the individual driver error that is its most visible symptom.
Forms of Trucking Company Negligence
Trucking company negligence takes many forms, each of which can independently contribute to catastrophic accidents. Negligent hiring occurs when a company fails to adequately screen driver applicants — overlooking disqualifying safety records, previous DUI convictions, or inadequate training and certification. Federal regulations require trucking companies to verify a driver’s employment history, check their driving record through the FMCSA’s Pre-Employment Screening Program, conduct drug and alcohol testing, and verify CDL validity. Companies that skip or shortcut these steps put dangerous drivers on the road. Negligent supervision involves failing to monitor driver performance, ignoring hours-of-service violations revealed by ELD data, overlooking patterns of speeding or unsafe driving, or failing to act on complaints about a driver’s behavior. Negligent maintenance — deferring required inspections, using substandard replacement parts, or ignoring driver reports of mechanical problems — puts mechanically unsafe trucks in service. Negligent retention means continuing to employ a driver with a documented pattern of safety violations, accidents, or substance abuse rather than terminating employment as safety demands.
How Negligent Business Practices Create Dangerous Conditions
The trucking industry operates on thin margins, creating constant pressure to reduce costs and maximize miles driven. This economic reality drives many forms of corporate negligence. Companies that compensate drivers per mile rather than per hour create direct financial incentives to speed, skip rest breaks, and drive while fatigued. Unrealistic delivery schedules force drivers to choose between violating hours-of-service rules and losing loads. Maintenance cost-cutting leads to deferred repairs — a brake adjustment that costs $300 in the shop can prevent a crash that costs millions in liability, yet the immediate financial pressure is to postpone the repair. Some companies operate as “chameleon carriers” — when their safety record becomes so poor that federal regulators take action, they dissolve and reincorporate under a new name, evading accountability. The FMCSA’s Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program scores carriers on safety performance, but many carriers with alarming scores continue operating. McFarlane Law uses these CSA scores as evidence of systemic safety failures when building cases against negligent trucking companies.
Respondeat Superior and Direct Liability
Under the legal doctrine of respondeat superior, trucking companies are vicariously liable for the negligent acts of their drivers committed within the scope of employment. This means that if a company driver causes an accident while performing job duties, the company is automatically liable for the resulting damages — regardless of whether the company itself did anything wrong. Direct negligence claims go further, holding the company liable for its own independent failures: negligent hiring, supervision, maintenance, entrustment, and retention. Direct negligence claims are particularly important because they can support claims for exemplary (punitive) damages under Texas law when the company’s conduct is shown to be grossly negligent or malicious. The distinction between company drivers and independent contractors is critical. Some trucking companies attempt to classify their drivers as independent contractors to avoid vicarious liability. However, Texas courts look at the actual degree of control the company exercises over the driver — if the company controls routes, schedules, equipment, and methods of work, the driver is functionally an employee regardless of what the contract says.
How McFarlane Law Proves Trucking Company Negligence
Building a case against a trucking company requires access to extensive corporate records that the company will not voluntarily produce. McFarlane Law moves quickly to send preservation letters demanding that the company retain all relevant evidence, then uses formal discovery to obtain driver qualification files, hiring records, training logs, ELD data, dispatch communications, maintenance records, drug and alcohol testing results, safety meeting minutes, and CSA scores. We retain industry experts — former trucking company safety directors, FMCSA compliance specialists, and human resources professionals — who can testify about how the company’s practices deviated from federal regulations and industry standards. Our attorneys depose company executives, safety managers, dispatchers, and maintenance supervisors to establish exactly who knew what and when. When the evidence shows a pattern of cutting corners to boost profits, we pursue exemplary damages that punish the company and deter future misconduct. Contact McFarlane Law at (512) 222-4900 or (432) 803-5000 to discuss your case.
Back to: Texas Truck Accident Lawyer
Related Practice Areas
Free Case Review
Injured in a truck accident? Get the compensation you deserve.
Your information is confidential. No fee unless we win.