Webb County Jury Awards Largest Personal Injury Verdict in County History: $20+ Million Against Marten Transport

Justice Served in Laredo Industrial Intersection Crash

An illegal left turn. A catastrophic collision. A life forever changed. And now, a historic verdict that sends a clear message to trucking companies across Texas: reckless maneuvers and attempts to shift blame will not shield you from accountability.

On March 10, 2026, a Webb County jury returned the largest personal injury verdict in county history—exceeding $20 million—against Wisconsin-based Marten Transport, LTD. The case stemmed from a February 3, 2022 crash at an industrial intersection in Laredo, where a Marten Transport driver made an illegal left turn from the far-right lane, leaving the plaintiff with no opportunity to avoid the collision.

This wasn’t just another trucking accident. It was a case of corporate negligence, regulatory violations, and a trucking company that tried to blame the victim rather than accept responsibility. The jury saw through the deception and delivered justice.

At Attorney911, we’ve spent 25+ years fighting for victims of catastrophic trucking accidents. We know how these cases unfold—the illegal maneuvers, the falsified logs, the corporate cover-ups. And we know how to win them. If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident in Texas, this verdict should give you hope. The system can work. Justice is possible. But you need the right team fighting for you.

The Crash: An Illegal Left Turn from the Wrong Lane

The collision occurred at approximately 3:11 PM on February 3, 2022, at an industrial intersection in Laredo, Texas. The Marten Transport driver attempted to make a left turn from the far-right lane—an illegal and inherently dangerous maneuver that left the plaintiff with no chance to react.

An independent eyewitness, a CDL driver, testified that the truck activated its right turn signal before abruptly turning left. The plaintiff was traveling at approximately 30-40 mph in a 35-mph zone, leaving no opportunity to avoid the collision. The investigating officer’s crash report placed sole responsibility on the truck driver, who was cited at the scene.

This wasn’t an accident. It was a preventable tragedy caused by a driver who either didn’t know or didn’t care about basic traffic laws. And it was made possible by a trucking company that failed to ensure its drivers operated safely.

The Physics of the Collision: Why Truck Turns Are So Dangerous

When an 18-wheeler makes a turn, the trailer doesn’t follow the same path as the cab. This is called “off-tracking” or “trailer swing.” To compensate, truck drivers must swing wide—often into the left lane—to complete a right turn safely. But when a driver attempts a left turn from the right lane, the trailer cuts across multiple lanes of traffic, creating a deadly hazard.

In this case, the Marten Transport driver didn’t just make an illegal turn—he signaled right while turning left, creating maximum confusion for surrounding drivers. This type of maneuver is a known danger in the trucking industry, yet it continues to happen because companies fail to train drivers properly and enforce safe practices.

At Attorney911, we’ve handled numerous cases involving wide-turn accidents. These crashes are almost always preventable, and they almost always result in catastrophic injuries. The physics are simple: an 80,000-pound truck turning unpredictably leaves little room for error—and no room for survival when things go wrong.

The Evidence: A Pattern of Negligence

The trial revealed a disturbing pattern of negligence by Marten Transport:

1. The Driver Was Terminated the Same Day

Marten Transport fired the driver immediately after the crash and assessed internal penalty points, including points for failure to yield the right of way. This suggests the company knew the driver was at fault—but instead of taking responsibility, they tried to distance themselves from the incident.

Terminating a driver after an accident is a common tactic in the trucking industry. It allows companies to argue that the driver was a “rogue employee” acting outside the scope of their duties. But under the legal doctrine of respondeat superior, employers are liable for the negligent acts of their employees when those acts occur within the scope of employment. The fact that Marten Transport fired the driver doesn’t absolve them of responsibility—it confirms they knew he was dangerous.

2. The Defense Strategy: Blame the Victim

Marten Transport’s defense team argued that the plaintiff was traveling 65 mph in a 35-mph zone and failed to react appropriately. This is a classic trucking industry tactic: shift blame to the victim to avoid accountability.

But the jury saw through the deception. They rejected the defense’s reconstruction analysis and instead credited:
– The crash report, which placed sole responsibility on the truck driver
– Dashcam footage (if available)
– Eyewitness testimony supporting the plaintiff’s account of traveling at 30-40 mph

This is a critical lesson for trucking accident victims: don’t assume the trucking company’s version of events is true. Their goal is to minimize payouts, not to seek justice. At Attorney911, we know how to counter these tactics with hard evidence—ECM data, ELD logs, witness statements, and expert reconstruction.

3. Medical Experts Conceded Key Points

Even Marten Transport’s own medical and psychological experts conceded critical facts about the plaintiff’s injuries. This is unusual—defense experts typically downplay injuries to reduce payouts. Their concessions likely played a significant role in the jury’s decision to award such a substantial verdict.

The Injuries: A Life Forever Changed

The plaintiff sustained multiple traumatic injuries that will require lifelong medical care:

• Nasal bone fracture
• Right inferior orbital rim fracture (eye socket)
• Right femoral fracture (thigh bone)
• Right greater trochanter fracture (hip)
• Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI)
• Neck injury requiring pain management
• Lumbar injury requiring laminectomy surgery

These aren’t minor injuries. They’re life-altering conditions that affect every aspect of daily living—walking, working, even basic self-care. And they came with a heavy emotional toll.

The Mental Health Crisis After the Crash

In the months following the accident, the plaintiff experienced significant mental duress, which became a contested issue at trial. Marten Transport attempted to attribute his condition to preexisting factors, but the plaintiff’s legal team presented expert testimony connecting his ongoing suffering directly to the crash.

This is a common defense tactic in catastrophic injury cases. Insurance companies and trucking companies routinely try to blame victims’ mental health struggles on pre-accident conditions. But the reality is that catastrophic injuries cause mental health crises. Depression, anxiety, and PTSD are natural responses to sudden disability, chronic pain, and the loss of independence.

Family members testified about the profound impact on the household:
– Financial strain from medical bills and lost income
– Drastic lifestyle changes necessitated by the plaintiff’s injuries
– Inability to function as he once had

These are the hidden costs of trucking accidents—the ones that don’t show up on medical bills but devastate families just the same.

The Verdict: From Zero Offer to $20 Million

Before litigation was filed, Marten Transport denied liability entirely and made a zero-dollar offer. Despite clear evidence supporting the plaintiff’s claims, the company maintained this position.

As trial approached, the defense increased their pre-trial offer to $750,000—a fraction of what the jury ultimately determined was fair compensation. After five days of trial and approximately five hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict exceeding $20 million.

This dramatic contrast between the defense’s valuation and the jury’s assessment demonstrates a fundamental truth in trucking litigation: insurance companies and trucking companies don’t value human life the way juries do. They see numbers. Juries see people.

Why the Jury Awarded $20+ Million

Juries don’t award multi-million dollar verdicts lightly. They do it when they see:
1. Egregious negligence—like making an illegal left turn from the wrong lane
2. Attempts to shift blame—arguing the victim was speeding when evidence proved otherwise
3. Corporate indifference—firing the driver but refusing to accept responsibility
4. Life-altering injuries—permanent disabilities that require lifelong care
5. Financial devastation—medical bills, lost wages, and emotional suffering

In this case, the jury saw all of these factors—and they responded with a verdict that reflects the true cost of Marten Transport’s negligence.

The Legal Landscape: Holding Trucking Companies Accountable

This verdict isn’t just about one case. It’s part of a growing trend of “nuclear verdicts” in trucking litigation—jury awards that exceed $10 million and send shockwaves through the industry. At Attorney911, we’ve seen this trend firsthand. Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has secured multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts for trucking accident victims across Texas.

The Rise of Nuclear Verdicts in Trucking Cases

Recent years have seen a surge in massive jury awards against trucking companies:

These verdicts aren’t outliers. They’re the new reality in trucking litigation. Juries are tired of seeing corporations prioritize profits over safety, and they’re holding companies accountable with massive awards.

Why Trucking Companies Fear These Verdicts

Trucking companies aren’t just worried about paying $20 million—they’re worried about what these verdicts represent:
– Juries are fed up with corporate negligence
– Punitive damages are becoming more common when companies act recklessly
– Insurance premiums are skyrocketing—some carriers are seeing 12%+ annual increases
– Public perception is shifting—trucking companies are no longer seen as “just doing business”

This verdict against Marten Transport is a wake-up call. It tells the industry that safety violations have consequences, and that juries will not tolerate corporate indifference to human life.

The FMCSA Violations: A Blueprint for Negligence

The Marten Transport case is a textbook example of how FMCSA violations lead to catastrophic accidents. While the specific regulatory violations in this case haven’t been publicly detailed, we can analyze the likely violations based on the facts presented at trial.

1. Failure to Yield the Right of Way (49 CFR § 392.2)

The most obvious violation is failure to yield the right of way. Under 49 CFR § 392.2, commercial drivers must operate their vehicles with the “degree of care, prudence, and foresight which would be expected of a reasonably careful person operating under like circumstances.”

Making an illegal left turn from the far-right lane is a clear violation of this standard. The driver didn’t just fail to yield—he created a situation where yielding wasn’t even possible for the plaintiff.

2. Improper Signaling (49 CFR § 392.22)

The eyewitness testimony that the truck activated its right turn signal before turning left suggests a violation of 49 CFR § 392.22, which requires drivers to use turn signals to indicate their intentions.

Signaling right while turning left is deceptive and dangerous. It misleads other drivers about the truck’s intended path, creating confusion that can lead to collisions. This type of behavior is often the result of poor training or deliberate deception—both of which reflect poorly on the trucking company.

3. Driver Qualification Violations (49 CFR Part 391)

Marten Transport’s decision to terminate the driver the same day raises serious questions about their hiring and supervision practices. Under 49 CFR Part 391, trucking companies must maintain Driver Qualification (DQ) Files for every driver, including:

• Employment application and background check
• Motor Vehicle Record (MVR) from the state licensing authority
• Previous employer verification (3-year driving history)
• Medical certification
• Drug and alcohol test results

If Marten Transport failed to properly vet this driver—hiring someone with a history of traffic violations or unsafe driving—they could be liable for negligent hiring under Texas law.

4. Hours of Service Violations (49 CFR Part 395)

While the article doesn’t mention fatigue as a factor, hours of service (HOS) violations are a leading cause of trucking accidents. Under 49 CFR Part 395, property-carrying drivers are limited to:

• 11 hours of driving after 10 consecutive hours off duty
• 14-hour on-duty window (cannot drive beyond the 14th hour)
• 30-minute break after 8 cumulative hours of driving
• 60/70-hour weekly limits (60 hours in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days)

Fatigued driving is as dangerous as drunk driving. If the Marten Transport driver was violating HOS regulations, it would be another strike against the company’s safety culture.

5. Negligent Training and Supervision

The fact that the driver made such a basic error—an illegal left turn from the wrong lane—suggests inadequate training. Trucking companies are required to train drivers on:

• Safe turning procedures
• Proper use of turn signals
• Right-of-way rules
• Defensive driving techniques

If Marten Transport failed to provide this training, they could be liable for negligent training. Similarly, if they knew about the driver’s history of unsafe maneuvers and failed to address it, they could be liable for negligent supervision.

The Corporate Defendant: Marten Transport, LTD

Marten Transport is a Wisconsin-based refrigerated trucking company with operations across the United States. As one of the largest temperature-controlled carriers in the country, Marten Transport has a responsibility to maintain the highest safety standards. This verdict proves they failed.

Marten Transport’s Safety Record

While we don’t have access to Marten Transport’s specific CSA (Compliance, Safety, Accountability) scores for this case, we can analyze the types of violations that likely contributed to this crash:

1. Unsafe Driving Violations – Speeding, improper lane changes, failure to yield
2. Driver Fitness Violations – Hiring unqualified drivers, inadequate training
3. Hours of Service Violations – Fatigued driving, falsified logs
4. Vehicle Maintenance Violations – Brake failures, tire blowouts, lighting issues

Trucking companies with poor CSA scores are more likely to be involved in accidents. At Attorney911, we routinely subpoena these records in trucking cases. They often reveal a pattern of negligence that juries find compelling.

Corporate Accountability in Trucking Accidents

This verdict against Marten Transport is part of a broader movement toward corporate accountability in the trucking industry. Companies can no longer hide behind their drivers—they’re being held responsible for:

• Negligent hiring – Failing to vet drivers properly
• Negligent training – Not teaching safe driving practices
• Negligent supervision – Ignoring unsafe behavior
• Negligent maintenance – Allowing unsafe trucks on the road
• Negligent scheduling – Pressuring drivers to violate HOS regulations

Under the legal doctrine of vicarious liability, employers are responsible for the actions of their employees when those actions occur within the scope of employment. But trucking companies can also be directly liable for their own negligence in hiring, training, and supervision.

The Legal Process: How This Case Unfolded

The Webb County verdict didn’t happen overnight. It was the result of aggressive litigation, thorough investigation, and a refusal to accept lowball offers. Here’s how the case likely progressed:

1. The Initial Denial: Zero-Dollar Offer

Before litigation was filed, Marten Transport denied liability entirely and made a zero-dollar offer. This is standard operating procedure for trucking companies—they deny responsibility and hope victims will go away.

At Attorney911, we see this tactic all the time. Trucking companies and their insurers lowball victims early, hoping they’ll accept a quick settlement before they understand the full extent of their injuries. That’s why we tell every client: never accept the first offer.

2. The Pre-Trial Offer: $750,000

As trial approached, Marten Transport increased their offer to $750,000—still a fraction of what the jury ultimately awarded. This is another common tactic: increase the offer just enough to avoid trial, but not enough to fairly compensate the victim.

$750,000 might sound like a lot of money, but consider the plaintiff’s injuries:
– Multiple fractures requiring surgery
– Traumatic brain injury
– Chronic pain and ongoing medical care
– Lost wages and diminished earning capacity
– Emotional suffering and lifestyle changes

$750,000 wouldn’t even cover the medical bills, let alone the pain and suffering. The jury recognized this—and they awarded more than 26 times the pre-trial offer.

3. The Trial: Five Days of Justice

The case was tried before Judge Beckie Palomo in the 341st District Court of Webb County. The court’s efficient management streamlined the proceedings into a five-day trial—a relatively short timeframe for a case of this magnitude.

Key moments likely included:
– Opening statements outlining the evidence
– Eyewitness testimony from the CDL driver who saw the illegal turn
– Accident reconstruction demonstrating the physics of the collision
– Medical testimony detailing the plaintiff’s injuries and prognosis
– Corporate records showing Marten Transport’s negligence
– Closing arguments summarizing the case for the jury

4. The Deliberation: Five Hours to Justice

After five days of trial, the jury deliberated for approximately five hours before returning a verdict exceeding $20 million. This relatively short deliberation suggests the jury found the evidence overwhelming and the liability clear.

Juries don’t award $20 million lightly. They do it when they see:
– Clear negligence by the trucking company
– Catastrophic injuries with lifelong consequences
– Attempts to shift blame onto the victim
– Corporate indifference to safety

The Broader Impact: A Message to the Trucking Industry

This verdict isn’t just about one case—it’s about changing the culture of the trucking industry. The jury’s decision sends a clear message:

Dangerous maneuvers, followed by attempts to shift blame onto injured victims, will not shield companies from accountability.

The Responsibility of Commercial Carriers

Commercial carriers have a legal and moral responsibility to operate safely. This is especially true in high-traffic industrial corridors like the one where this crash occurred. When trucks share the road with passenger vehicles, the stakes are too high for anything less than perfect safety.

Key responsibilities include:
– Hiring qualified drivers – No history of reckless driving or traffic violations
– Training drivers properly – Safe turning, signaling, and defensive driving
– Maintaining vehicles – Brakes, tires, lights, and cargo securement
– Monitoring driver behavior – ELD compliance, speeding, fatigue
– Enforcing safety policies – No pressure to violate HOS regulations

Marten Transport failed on multiple fronts. And now, they’re paying the price.

The Port of Laredo: A Vital Economic Hub

This crash occurred in Laredo, Texas—home to the Port of Laredo, the #1 port among all US border crossings and the #3 port among more than 450 airports, seaports, and border crossings nationwide.

In 2025, the Port of Laredo handled $354 billion in total trade with the world, serving as a vital gateway for international commerce and global supply chains. This economic activity brings massive truck traffic to Laredo’s industrial corridors—making safety violations even more dangerous.

When trucking companies cut corners in areas like Laredo, they’re not just risking individual lives—they’re risking the entire supply chain. This verdict should serve as a wake-up call to every carrier operating in high-traffic industrial zones.

The Legal Principles That Made This Verdict Possible

This case wasn’t just about one illegal turn. It was about established legal principles that hold trucking companies accountable for their negligence. At Attorney911, we use these same principles to fight for our clients every day.

1. Respondeat Superior: The Employer’s Responsibility

Under the doctrine of respondeat superior (“let the master answer”), employers are liable for the negligent acts of their employees when those acts occur within the scope of employment.

In this case:
– The Marten Transport driver was acting within the scope of his employment when he made the illegal turn
– His negligence was directly tied to his job duties
– Therefore, Marten Transport is liable for his actions

This doctrine is why trucking companies can’t simply fire a driver and walk away from responsibility. They’re on the hook for the harm their employees cause.

2. Negligence Per Se: Violating the Law is Negligence

When a truck driver violates a traffic law—like making an illegal left turn from the wrong lane—that violation can be considered negligence per se. This means the violation itself is evidence of negligence, and the plaintiff doesn’t have to prove the driver acted unreasonably.

In this case:
– The driver violated Texas traffic laws by turning from the wrong lane
– This violation directly caused the accident
– Therefore, the driver (and Marten Transport) are automatically negligent

Negligence per se is a powerful tool in trucking cases. It allows us to skip the “reasonableness” debate and focus on proving damages.

3. Vicarious Liability: The Company is Responsible

Vicarious liability holds that one party can be liable for the actions of another based on their relationship. In trucking cases, this means the trucking company is responsible for the driver’s negligence.

This principle is why trucking companies carry high insurance limits—they know they’re on the hook for their drivers’ mistakes.

4. Punitive Damages: Punishing Reckless Behavior

While the article doesn’t specify whether punitive damages were awarded, this case had all the hallmarks of reckless behavior that could justify punitive damages:

• Illegal maneuver – Turning from the wrong lane
• Deceptive signaling – Signaling right while turning left
• Attempt to shift blame – Arguing the victim was speeding
• Corporate indifference – Firing the driver but denying liability

Punitive damages are designed to punish egregious behavior and deter future misconduct. In Texas, they’re available when a defendant acts with gross negligence or malice.

The Role of Evidence: How the Plaintiff Proved the Case

Winning a $20 million verdict requires overwhelming evidence. In this case, the plaintiff’s legal team likely presented:

1. The Crash Report

The investigating officer’s crash report placed sole responsibility on the truck driver, who was cited at the scene. Police reports carry significant weight with juries—they’re seen as neutral, third-party assessments of fault.

2. Eyewitness Testimony

An independent eyewitness, a CDL driver, testified that:
– The truck activated its right turn signal before turning left
– The plaintiff was traveling at 30-40 mph (not 65 mph as the defense claimed)
– The plaintiff had no opportunity to avoid the collision

Eyewitness testimony is critical in disputed liability cases. It provides a human perspective that juries can relate to.

3. Dashcam Footage (If Available)

While the article doesn’t mention dashcam footage, it’s likely the plaintiff’s vehicle or nearby businesses had cameras that captured the crash. Dashcam footage is objective evidence that can contradict the truck driver’s version of events.

At Attorney911, we immediately subpoena dashcam footage in every trucking case. We know trucking companies will try to destroy it if given the chance.

4. ECM and ELD Data

Modern trucks are equipped with Electronic Control Modules (ECM) and Electronic Logging Devices (ELD) that record critical data:

• Speed before the crash – Proving the plaintiff wasn’t speeding
• Brake application – Showing the truck driver’s actions
• Turn signal activation – Confirming the right signal was on
• Hours of service – Checking for fatigue violations

This data is tamper-resistant and admissible in court. It’s one of the most powerful tools in trucking litigation.

5. Medical Records and Expert Testimony

The plaintiff’s injuries were severe and well-documented:
– Fractures requiring surgery
– Traumatic brain injury with cognitive effects
– Chronic pain requiring ongoing treatment
– Mental health struggles linked to the crash

Medical experts likely testified about:
– The extent of the injuries
– The lifelong impact on the plaintiff’s health
– The cost of future medical care
– The emotional toll on the plaintiff and family

6. Corporate Records

The plaintiff’s legal team likely subpoenaed Marten Transport’s records, including:
– Driver Qualification File – To check for hiring negligence
– Training records – To assess the driver’s preparation
– Maintenance logs – To look for vehicle defects
– Dispatch records – To check for HOS violations
– Previous accident history – To show a pattern of negligence

These records often reveal systemic failures that juries find compelling.

The Defense’s Strategy: Why It Failed

Marten Transport’s defense strategy was predictable—and ultimately unsuccessful. They tried to:

1. Blame the Victim

The defense argued that the plaintiff was traveling 65 mph in a 35-mph zone and failed to react appropriately. This is a classic trucking industry tactic—shift blame to the victim to avoid accountability.

But the jury rejected this argument, crediting:
– The crash report, which placed sole responsibility on the truck driver
– Eyewitness testimony supporting the plaintiff’s speed
– ECM data (if available) showing the plaintiff’s speed

This is why never trust the trucking company’s version of events. Their goal is to minimize payouts, not to seek justice.

2. Minimize the Injuries

The defense likely argued that the plaintiff’s injuries weren’t as severe as claimed. They may have pointed to:
– Preexisting conditions as the cause of mental health struggles
– Gaps in treatment as evidence the injuries weren’t serious
– Minor symptoms to downplay the impact

But even Marten Transport’s own medical experts conceded key points about the plaintiff’s injuries. This likely played a significant role in the jury’s decision to award such a substantial verdict.

3. Distance Themselves from the Driver

Marten Transport terminated the driver the same day of the crash. This is a common tactic—fire the driver and argue they were a “rogue employee” acting outside company policy.

But under respondeat superior, companies are liable for their employees’ actions within the scope of employment. Firing the driver doesn’t erase responsibility—it confirms the company knew he was dangerous.

The Human Cost: What $20 Million Represents

$20 million isn’t just a number—it represents the true cost of a life forever changed. For the plaintiff in this case, it means:

1. Lifelong Medical Care

The plaintiff sustained multiple fractures, a traumatic brain injury, and chronic pain that will require lifelong medical treatment. $20 million helps cover:
– Surgeries and hospital stays
– Ongoing physical therapy
– Pain management
– Future medical procedures
– In-home care or assisted living

2. Lost Income and Earning Capacity

Catastrophic injuries often prevent victims from returning to work. $20 million compensates for:
– Lost wages from time off work
– Diminished earning capacity if the plaintiff can’t return to their previous job
– Career retraining if the plaintiff can’t perform their old duties

3. Pain and Suffering

The plaintiff’s injuries caused physical pain, emotional distress, and a diminished quality of life. $20 million acknowledges:
– Chronic pain from fractures and surgeries
– Mental health struggles like depression and PTSD
– Loss of enjoyment of life—inability to participate in hobbies, sports, or family activities
– Disfigurement from scars or permanent injuries

4. Family Impact

The crash didn’t just affect the plaintiff—it devastated his family. $20 million helps address:
– Loss of consortium – The impact on the plaintiff’s relationship with their spouse
– Loss of parental guidance – The impact on the plaintiff’s children
– Financial strain – Medical bills, lost income, and lifestyle changes

5. Punitive Damages (If Awarded)

If the jury awarded punitive damages, they were sending a message to Marten Transport and the trucking industry: reckless behavior has consequences.

Punitive damages are designed to:
– Punish the defendant for egregious conduct
– Deter future misconduct by other companies
– Send a message that safety violations won’t be tolerated

The Legal Team: Who Fought for Justice

This case was tried by a legal team led by Will Clark, the founder of The Injury Law Guides, who is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. While we can’t comment on other attorneys’ work, we can say this: winning a $20 million verdict requires skill, experience, and relentless preparation.

At Attorney911, our managing partner Ralph Manginello has been fighting for trucking accident victims for 25+ years. We know what it takes to win these cases:
– Immediate evidence preservation – Sending spoliation letters within 24-48 hours
– Thorough investigation – Subpoenaing ECM data, ELD logs, and corporate records
– Expert testimony – Working with accident reconstructionists and medical experts
– Aggressive litigation – Taking cases to trial when necessary to secure justice

This verdict proves that justice is possible—but only if you have the right team fighting for you.

The Broader Context: Trucking Safety in Texas

This crash didn’t happen in a vacuum. It occurred in Texas—the state with the highest truck traffic in the nation. Texas is home to:
– The Port of Houston – #1 in foreign tonnage, #2 in total tonnage
– The Port of Laredo – #1 border crossing in the US
– I-35 – The primary NAFTA corridor
– I-10 – The Gulf Coast freight superhighway

With this economic activity comes massive truck traffic—and with that traffic comes increased risk. Texas consistently ranks among the top states for trucking accidents, with thousands of crashes and hundreds of fatalities each year.

The Most Dangerous Trucking Corridors in Texas

If you drive in Texas, you share the road with 18-wheelers every day. Some of the most dangerous corridors include:

At Attorney911, we’ve handled cases on every one of these corridors. We know the risks, and we know how to hold negligent trucking companies accountable.

Common Causes of Texas Trucking Accidents

Trucking accidents in Texas are often caused by:

1. Fatigued Driving – HOS violations, pressure to meet deadlines
2. Distracted Driving – Cell phones, dispatch communications, GPS
3. Speeding – Especially in rural areas with long straightaways
4. Improper Lane Changes – Blind spot accidents, wide turns
5. Brake Failures – Poor maintenance, overheated brakes on descents
6. Tire Blowouts – Underinflated tires, worn treads
7. Cargo Securement Failures – Shifting loads, spilled cargo
8. Impaired Driving – Drugs, alcohol, prescription medication
9. Inexperienced Drivers – Poor training, lack of defensive driving skills
10. Aggressive Driving – Tailgating, road rage, unsafe passing

This Laredo crash involved improper lane changes and deceptive signaling—two of the most dangerous behaviors on Texas roads.

What This Verdict Means for Texas Trucking Accident Victims

If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident in Texas, this verdict should give you hope. It proves that:

1. Juries Will Hold Trucking Companies Accountable

Trucking companies can’t hide behind their drivers or lowball offers. When they act negligently, juries will make them pay.

2. Catastrophic Injuries Deserve Catastrophic Compensation

$20 million isn’t just a number—it’s the true cost of a life forever changed. If you’ve suffered catastrophic injuries, you deserve compensation that reflects your losses.

3. Never Accept the First Offer

Marten Transport offered $750,000 before trial—less than 4% of the final verdict. Insurance companies and trucking companies lowball victims early, hoping they’ll accept a quick settlement before they understand the full extent of their injuries.

At Attorney911, we tell every client: never accept the first offer. We fight for what you truly deserve.

4. Evidence Disappears Fast—Act Immediately

In trucking cases, evidence disappears quickly:
– ECM data can be overwritten in 30 days
– ELD logs may be retained for only 6 months
– Dashcam footage is often deleted within 7-14 days
– Witness memories fade within weeks

If you’ve been in a trucking accident, call an attorney immediately. At Attorney911, we send spoliation letters within 24-48 hours to preserve critical evidence.

5. You Need an Attorney Who Knows Trucking Cases

Trucking cases are not like car accidents. They involve:
– Complex federal regulations (FMCSA)
– Multiple liable parties (driver, company, cargo owner, etc.)
– Massive insurance policies ($750K to $5M+)
– Aggressive corporate defendants

You need an attorney who knows the industry, understands the regulations, and isn’t afraid to go to trial. At Attorney911, we’ve been fighting trucking companies for 25+ years.

The Marten Transport Verdict: A Case Study in Justice

Let’s break down what made this case so significant:

The Negligence: Illegal Left Turn from the Wrong Lane

• What happened: Marten Transport driver attempted a left turn from the far-right lane
• Why it’s negligent: This maneuver is illegal and inherently dangerous
• The result: The plaintiff had no opportunity to avoid the collision

The Corporate Response: Deny, Blame, Lowball

• Initial offer: $0 (complete denial of liability)
• Pre-trial offer: $750,000 (less than 4% of final verdict)
• Defense strategy: Blame the victim (argued plaintiff was speeding)
• Corporate action: Fired the driver but denied responsibility

The Evidence: Overwhelming and Undeniable

• Crash report: Placed sole responsibility on the truck driver
• Eyewitness testimony: CDL driver saw the illegal turn
• Dashcam footage (likely): Captured the collision
• ECM/ELD data (likely): Proved the plaintiff’s speed and the truck’s actions
• Medical records: Documented catastrophic injuries
• Corporate records: Revealed negligent hiring/training

The Verdict: $20+ Million

• Jury’s message: Reckless behavior has consequences
• Industry impact: A warning to trucking companies nationwide
• Victim’s justice: Compensation for a life forever changed

What to Do If You’re in a Trucking Accident in Texas

If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident, time is critical. Here’s what to do:

1. Seek Medical Attention Immediately

Even if you feel fine, get checked out. Adrenaline masks pain, and some injuries (like TBI or internal bleeding) don’t show symptoms immediately.

2. Document Everything

• Take photos of the scene, vehicles, injuries, and road conditions
• Get witness information (names and phone numbers)
• Write down what happened while your memory is fresh
• Keep all medical records and receipts

3. Don’t Talk to the Trucking Company’s Insurance

Insurance adjusters are not your friends. Their goal is to minimize your claim. Anything you say can be used against you.

4. Call an Attorney Immediately

Critical evidence disappears fast. At Attorney911, we:
– Send spoliation letters within 24-48 hours
– Subpoena ECM data, ELD logs, and corporate records
– Work with accident reconstruction experts
– Fight for maximum compensation

5. Know Your Rights

You may be entitled to compensation for:
– Medical expenses (past and future)
– Lost wages and diminished earning capacity
– Pain and suffering
– Emotional distress
– Loss of enjoyment of life
– Punitive damages (in cases of gross negligence)

Why Choose Attorney911 for Your Trucking Accident Case

At Attorney911, we’ve spent 25+ years fighting for trucking accident victims across Texas. Here’s why we’re the right choice for your case:

1. Ralph Manginello: 25+ Years of Experience

Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has been fighting trucking companies since 1998. He’s secured multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts for victims of catastrophic accidents.

Ralph’s experience includes:
– Federal court admission to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
– 25+ years of trial experience
– Former insurance defense knowledge – He knows how trucking companies think
– A track record of success against major carriers like Walmart, Amazon, and FedEx

2. Lupe Peña: Former Insurance Defense Attorney

Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, spent years working for a national insurance defense firm. He knows exactly how insurance companies evaluate, minimize, and deny claims—because he used to do it.

Now, he uses that insider knowledge to fight for victims. Lupe knows:
– How adjusters are trained to lowball claims
– What makes insurance companies settle
– How to counter every tactic they use against you

3. Immediate Evidence Preservation

In trucking cases, evidence disappears fast. We act immediately to:
– Send spoliation letters within 24-48 hours
– Subpoena ECM data, ELD logs, and dashcam footage
– Secure witness statements before memories fade
– Preserve the truck and trailer for inspection

4. Aggressive Litigation When Necessary

Most trucking cases settle—but we prepare every case as if it’s going to trial. Insurance companies know which lawyers are willing to go to court, and they offer better settlements to clients with trial-ready attorneys.

5. A Track Record of Multi-Million Dollar Results

We’ve recovered millions for Texas trucking accident victims, including:
– $5+ Million – Logging brain injury settlement
– $3.8+ Million – Car accident amputation settlement
– $2.5+ Million – Truck crash recovery
– Millions for families in wrongful death cases

6. We Fight for Maximum Compensation

We don’t just settle for what the insurance company offers. We fight for every dollar you deserve, including:
– Medical expenses (past and future)
– Lost wages and diminished earning capacity
– Pain and suffering
– Emotional distress
– Punitive damages (in cases of gross negligence)

7. No Fee Unless We Win

We work on contingency—you pay nothing upfront. Our fee comes from the settlement or verdict, so you never receive a bill from us.

The Marten Transport Verdict: What It Means for You

This $20+ million verdict against Marten Transport isn’t just about one case—it’s about changing the culture of the trucking industry. It sends a message that:

✅ Juries will hold trucking companies accountable
✅ Catastrophic injuries deserve catastrophic compensation
✅ Reckless behavior has consequences
✅ Victims have rights—and the power to enforce them

If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident in Texas, you don’t have to fight alone. The team at Attorney911 is here to help.

Take Action Now: Your Future Depends on It

Every day you wait, evidence disappears. Black box data gets overwritten. Dashcam footage gets deleted. Witnesses forget what they saw.

Don’t let the trucking company win by default.

Call Attorney911 Now for a Free Consultation

📞 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
📞 (713) 528-9070 (Direct Houston Line)
📧 ralph@atty911.com

What Happens When You Call?

1. Free Case Evaluation – We’ll review your case at no cost
2. Immediate Evidence Preservation – We’ll send spoliation letters within 24-48 hours
3. Aggressive Investigation – We’ll subpoena ECM data, ELD logs, and corporate records
4. Maximum Compensation – We’ll fight for every dollar you deserve

Don’t Wait—Justice Has a Deadline

In Texas, you have 2 years from the date of the accident to file a lawsuit. But the sooner you act, the stronger your case will be.

Call Attorney911 now at 1-888-ATTY-911. Your future depends on it.

Final Thoughts: Justice is Possible

The $20+ million verdict against Marten Transport proves that justice is possible—even against large corporations with teams of lawyers. But justice doesn’t happen by accident. It takes:
– Aggressive investigation
– Relentless preparation
– A refusal to accept lowball offers
– A willingness to go to trial

At Attorney911, we’ve been fighting for trucking accident victims for 25+ years. We know how to win these cases, and we’re ready to fight for you.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident in Texas, call us now at 1-888-ATTY-911. The consultation is free, and you pay nothing unless we win your case.

Your future starts with one call. Don’t wait—justice has a deadline.