Attorney Michael Rehm - (916) 233-7346
A fully loaded tractor-trailer weighs up to 80,000 pounds. A passenger vehicle weighs roughly 4,000 pounds. The physics of that mismatch produce injuries that are categorically different from most car accidents—and the legal framework that applies to commercial truck cases is also different.
Truck accident claims involve federal regulations, complex carrier liability rules, and in many cases multiple defendants: the driver, the trucking company, a cargo loader, a maintenance contractor, or some combination. Attorney Michael Rehm handles commercial truck accident cases throughout Sacramento County on a contingency fee basis.
Sacramento's major freight corridors—Interstate 5, US Highway 50, State Route 99, and Interstate 80—carry some of the heaviest commercial vehicle traffic in Northern California. Highway 99 south of Sacramento has more fog-related fatalities than any other roadway in the United States. These are not background facts. They are the conditions under which truck accidents happen here, and they bear directly on liability.
What You Can Recover
California's compensatory damages framework is designed to put injured plaintiffs in the position they would have occupied if the wrong had not occurred. Civil Code section 3333 states the rule directly. In a truck accident case, recoverable damages typically include:
Economic damages (objectively verifiable; joint and several under Proposition 51 / Civil Code § 1431.2):
- Past medical expenses
- Future medical expenses
- Lost earnings
- Impaired earning capacity
- Property damage
Noneconomic damages (subjective; several only under Civil Code § 1431.2):
- Pain and suffering
- Emotional distress
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Loss of consortium
CACI 3905A governs noneconomic damages. CACI—the Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions—are the standardized instructions California judges read to juries to explain what the law requires them to decide. No fixed standard applies to noneconomic damages. The jury has broad discretion.
Punitive damages: In truck accident cases, punitive damages are available more often than in ordinary car crash cases. Civil Code section 3294 permits punitive damages on clear and convincing evidence of malice, oppression, or fraud. CACI 3940 defines malice as intent to cause injury, or “despicable conduct with willful and knowing disregard of rights or safety of another.” A trucking company that knew its driver had accumulated hours violations and put him on the road anyway, or that knowingly deferred required maintenance, has direct exposure here. Punitive damages are not available against government entities. Government Code section 818.
Wrongful death: When a truck accident kills a family member, Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 identifies who may bring a wrongful death claim: surviving spouse or domestic partner, children, issue of deceased children, and anyone entitled to the decedent's property by intestate succession. The two-year statute of limitations under CCP section 335.1 runs from the date of death.
Why Truck Cases Are Legally Different
The standard of care applicable to commercial truck operators is not the same as the standard applicable to ordinary motorists. Federal regulations impose additional duties on commercial vehicle operators and the companies that employ or contract with them.
Federal Regulations as the Standard of Care
49 CFR section 392.14 requires commercial vehicle operators to use “extreme caution” when operating in hazardous conditions—snow, ice, rain, fog. In Weaver v. Chavez (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 1350, the court of appeal confirmed that a plaintiff is entitled to instruct the jury on this federal regulation as the applicable standard of care for a commercial vehicle operator. That is a higher standard than the basic speed law imposes on ordinary drivers.
The basic speed law—Vehicle Code section 22350—still applies independently: no person shall drive at a speed “greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.” A violation of section 22350 is negligence per se under CACI 706. On Highway 99 in tule fog, a commercial truck driver faces both the statutory negligence per se standard under section 22350 and the heightened federal “extreme caution” standard of 49 CFR section 392.14.
Cargo Securement
Vehicle Code section 23114(a) requires that cargo be secured so it cannot fall or be dislodged from the vehicle. A violation is negligence per se. In Baker-Smith v. Skolnick (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 340, the court rejected the defendant's attempt to use the excuse instruction under CACI 420 where the evidence showed the driver had not taken the simple step of checking the trailer before departure.
Federal regulations under 49 CFR sections 390.3, 390.11, 391.13, and 392.9 impose additional cargo securement responsibilities on hiring carriers even when the driver is classified as an independent contractor. The classification does not eliminate the carrier's obligations.
Brake Failure
When a defendant asserts brake failure as a defense and post-accident examination cannot uncover the cause, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove lack of causation. Harris v. Irish Truck Lines, Inc. (1974) 11 Cal.3d 373. The rationale: the defendant is in a better position to discover and preserve evidence of its own braking system. A trucking company that cannot explain why its brakes failed cannot simply assert brake failure and walk away.
Stationary Trucks
Not every truck accident involves a moving vehicle. In Cabral v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2011) 51 Cal.4th 764, the California Supreme Court held that a truck driver who parked his tractor-trailer alongside a highway in violation of an “emergency parking only” sign could be liable for the wrongful death of a motorist who swerved off the road and rear-ended the rig. The broad duty of care under Civil Code section 1714(a) applies to parked commercial vehicles as well as moving ones.
Who Is Responsible
The Driver
Every driver owes a duty of reasonable care under Civil Code section 1714(a) and the motor vehicle standard of care stated in CACI 700: “A person must use reasonable care in driving a vehicle. Drivers must keep a lookout for pedestrians, obstacles, and other vehicles. They must also control the speed and movement of their vehicles. The failure to use reasonable care in driving a vehicle is negligence.”
The Trucking Company—Employees
When the driver is an employee operating within the course and scope of employment, the carrier is vicariously liable for the driver's negligence under respondeat superior. This is standard.
The Trucking Company—Independent Contractors
This is where truck cases diverge sharply from car accident cases. A carrier that classifies its drivers as independent contractors to avoid liability runs directly into the “regulated hirer” doctrine.
California law recognizes that operating a tractor-semitrailer to transport freight is attended with very considerable risk and is highly regulated to protect public safety. A highway common carrier—a “for hire” motor carrier franchised by the California Public Utilities Commission or the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration—is liable for the negligence of its independent contractor truckers who cause a traffic accident. Gamboa v. Conti Trucking, Inc. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 663; Serna v. Pettey Leach Trucking, Inc. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1475.
The Federal Motor Carriers Act (49 U.S.C. § 14101 et seq.) defines “employee” broadly to include “an independent contractor while in the course of operating a commercial motor vehicle” (49 CFR § 390.5). Lease agreements between hiring carriers and independent drivers must give the hiring carrier exclusive use and control of the truck and full responsibility for its operation during the lease term (49 CFR § 376.12(c)(1)). Hiring carriers also bear independent federal responsibilities for ensuring that independent drivers are properly trained and that cargo is properly secured. AmeriGas Propane, LP v. Landstar Ranger, Inc. (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 981.
The regulated hirer doctrine does not apply to private carriers—companies that maintain trucks solely to haul their own property rather than freight for hire. Hill Bros. Chemical Co. v. Sup.Ct. (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1001. In those cases, the analysis reverts to ordinary respondeat superior and negligent entrustment theories.
Negligent Entrustment and Hiring
A vehicle owner is independently liable for knowingly entrusting a vehicle to an incompetent or unfit driver. Vehicle Code section 14606 makes it unlawful to permit an unlicensed driver to operate a vehicle. A carrier that fails to verify driver qualifications before putting a driver on the road carries direct exposure on a negligent entrustment theory, separate from and in addition to any vicarious liability.
DUI—Treble Damages Against the Employer
Civil Code section 3333.7 authorizes treble damages against the employer of a commercial vehicle driver who was under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance, where the employer willfully failed to comply with federal Department of Transportation drug and alcohol testing requirements. “Willful failure” under the statute includes an intentional and uncorrected failure to maintain a testing program, knowing use of a medically disqualified driver, or an attempt to conceal deficiencies in the program. Civil Code § 3333.7(b); Vehicle Code § 34623(c)(3). For purposes of this statute, “employer” includes a carrier that contracts with an owner-operator. Civil Code § 3333.7(c); Vehicle Code § 34624(b).
Sacramento Truck Corridors and Crash Data
Sacramento sits at the convergence of four major freight routes. Interstate 5 runs north-south through the Sacramento Valley, carrying heavy commercial traffic between the San Joaquin Valley and the Pacific Northwest. US Highway 50 runs east toward South Lake Tahoe and the Nevada border. State Route 99 parallels I-5 through the agricultural south. Interstate 80 connects Sacramento to the Bay Area to the west and to Reno to the east.
Highway 99 south of Sacramento presents a specific, well-documented hazard: tule fog. This corridor has more fog-related fatalities than any other roadway in the United States. Dense fog advisories run from November through March. A commercial truck operating in those conditions is subject to the “extreme caution” standard of 49 CFR section 392.14. A driver who maintains highway speed in zero-visibility tule fog faces liability under both state and federal standards.
Sacramento's High Injury Network, adopted under the city's Vision Zero program in 2017, identifies the corridors where fatal and serious-injury crashes concentrate. Seventy percent of the city's fatal crashes occur on a small fraction of its streets. The top priority corridors—Marysville Boulevard, El Camino Avenue, Broadway/Stockton Boulevard, South Stockton Boulevard, and Florin Road—also carry commercial vehicle traffic from the Port of Sacramento area through residential and commercial zones.
In 2023, Sacramento ranked second among California's 15 largest cities in total traffic victims, with 4,214 people killed or injured. The city ranked first for speed-related victims (745 people) and first for alcohol-involved victims (454 people). Commercial vehicles operating in this environment—on corridors that already generate a disproportionate share of the region's crash injuries—carry the full weight of those statistics.
Insurance in Truck Accident Cases
California's minimum liability insurance requirements for passenger vehicles—$30,000 per person, $60,000 per accident, $15,000 property damage for policies issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2025 (Vehicle Code § 16056, AB 1107)—bear no relationship to the damage a commercial truck can cause. Commercial carriers operating in interstate commerce are subject to substantially higher federal insurance requirements, and large carriers typically maintain layered coverage structures.
The practical implication: truck accident cases generally involve larger available insurance coverage than ordinary car accident cases. That does not mean coverage flows easily. Carriers and their insurers contest liability aggressively, and the complexity of the regulated hirer doctrine and federal standards means these cases require specific preparation before demand is made.
Uninsured motorist coverage under Insurance Code section 11580.2 is available in truck accident cases where coverage is disputed or the responsible party is uninsured.
Filing a Truck Accident Case in Sacramento County
Personal injury cases arising from truck accidents in Sacramento County are filed at the Gordon D. Schaber Courthouse, 720 Ninth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. The court handled 2,232 motor vehicle personal injury filings in fiscal year 2023–24.
The statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death in California is two years from the date of injury or death. Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. That deadline is firm.
If the truck was operated by a government entity—a Caltrans maintenance vehicle, a city public works truck, or a county fleet vehicle—the timeline is shorter. A government tort claim under Government Code section 911.2 must be presented within six months of the incident. Missing the six-month deadline bars the claim regardless of the two-year limitations period under CCP section 335.1.
California's pure comparative fault system applies. Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804 abolished contributory negligence. A plaintiff's own negligence reduces but does not bar recovery. CACI 405 governs; the defendant bears the burden of proving the plaintiff was negligent and that the negligence was a substantial factor in causing the harm.
Under Proposition 51 / Civil Code section 1431.2, economic damages are joint and several—each defendant is fully liable for all economic harm regardless of their percentage of fault. Noneconomic damages are several only—each defendant pays only their proportionate share.
Attorney Michael Rehm handles truck accident cases throughout Sacramento County on a contingency fee basis. No fee without a recovery. Call (916) 233-7346 for a free consultation—home visits and hospital visits available.