It seems that there may be a disconnect between Wal-Mart and the lawyers who are representing them in the lawsuit that was brought against them over the wreck that killed comedian James McNair and injured Tracy Morgan and others. In a statement released by Wal-Mart back when the accident first occurred, they claimed that they were “committed to doing the right thing for all involved.” Despite this commitment, Wal-Mart lawyers have just claimed that Wal-Mart is not responsible for the death or injuries because the passengers weren’t wearing seatbelts.
The following was filed by Wal-Mart’s lawyers earlier this week.
“Upon information and belief, plaintiffs’ injuries, if any, were caused, in whole or in part, by plaintiffs’ failure to properly wear an appropriate available seatbelt restraint device. By failing to exercise ordinary care in making use of available seatbelts…plaintiffs acted unreasonably… Accordingly, all or a portion of the injuries could have been diminished or minimized by the exercise of reasonable conduct in using the available seatbelts.”
This incredibly evasive language claims that if in fact the passengers did receive any injuries as a result of the crash (the language implies that Wal-Mart apparently isn’t willing to admit that anyone was injured in the accident despite the fact that someone died), then it was almost all – if not entirely – due to them not wearing seatbelts.
I’m no expert and I wasn’t there to witness the crash, but I’m fairly certain that based off of the pictures of the crash and the 3D laser rendering of the vehicles, even if the passengers had been wearing seatbelts, helmets, and inflatable sumo suits, they still would have been injured in the crash.
In response to their claims, Tracy Morgan emailed this response to USA Today:
“After I heard what Walmart said in court I felt I had to speak out. I can’t believe Walmart is blaming me for an accident that they caused. My friends and I were doing nothing wrong. I want to thank my fans for sticking with me during this difficult time. I love you all. I’m fighting hard every day to get back.”
Wal-Mart spokesperson Brooke Buchanan wrote to the USA Today in response, noting that her company is trying to “encourage settlement discussions” and that they “remain committed to doing what’s right.”
Next Story: Driver’s Facebook Photos Lead To $1 Million Settlement
Source: overdrive, ttnews, truckinginfo, usatoday, thetruckersreport
Image: NTSB
Honch says
Just another reason I avoid shopping at WalMart…
Don says
Sam Walton must be cussing out his kids from his grave. Walmart is a horrible company.
Joe Skeptical says
Horribly profitable, paying their transportation department drivers well.
Robert says
And yet there is a lawsuit against them currently, from their former drivers over just such a matter
Don says
Hey, Joe Skeptical, do you drive for Wally world? They still suck, and they don’t mind breaking the law. They force (non-Wally worlders) to violate federal law every day. If that is your idea of a good company, something is wrong with you.
jeff says
Seatbelts have been proven time and time again to save lives in accidents and are the law for all you arm chair lawyers. Drivers have to wear them. Use a little common sense.
Cowboy says
@Jeff, being an ex LEO and seeing my fair share of accidents, I hate to break it to you but seat belts are not 100% safe 100% of the time. I have personally seen accidents that the only reason the victim survived was due to the fact they were not wearing them as well as accidents were if they were it would have kept them alive i.e. mostly ejection type instances. This stance that Wal-Mart is taking is absolutely absurd and a very sleazy way to shed blame when in fact if their vehicle never struck the victims in the first place, them wearing the seat belts has no relevance to the issue. Could it have saved a life, looking at the condition of the van, it is highly doubtful, they are just hoping for a technicality rather than fact to swing the case the way they desire.
chris says
I agre with you cowboy but how is this any different than how a lot of drivers get treated… oh well the victom is completely at falt… but if the truck driver hadnt been speeding a week ago he wouldn’t have been there for the accident to happen in the first place… so hes guilty.. its all bs
GroceryGetter says
Okay… I do agree that there is no denying that the accident happened. The truck hit the van. Nobody can argue that point. Where I tend to come on the side of Wal-Mart (a corporation I happen to HATE with a passion) is that IF the occupants of the van had been wearing the seatbelts, the injuries would most likely not have been as serious. Would the death have occoured if the unfortunate gentleman had been belted into his seat when the truck hit? We likely won’t ever know the answer, but there are statistics on the use of seatbelts that says they do reduce injuries and fatalities. Again… like Cowboy says… they are not 100% effective 100% of the time.
… and let’s not forget what “doing what’s right” actually means… it doesn’t mean making an easy payday for the plaintiffs, it means getting to the truth of the matter and making sure everyone involved has their role in the incident identified and clarified… then, if damages are assessed, the appropriate compensation is paid out to those that rightfully deserve it.
Robert says
I guess if I was jaywalking across some street when a gang banger shot me, that makes me liable too right GG?
hinch says
I agree with Grocery and jeff on this, how many times have you seen the numbers of crashes for the state’s we drive in and more than half of fatalities where because they didn’t have a seatbelt on.and what’s your guy’s excuse for this? Wally wourld sucks! Yeah I dont like their business practices much neither, BUT, thats no excuse for not wearing the belt. That’s exactly what the belt s are for…the just in case crashes. …DUH!!!
James says
You bet that Walmart wants to do what’s right…for Walmart’s executives. They’ve become such a sleepy company I’m surprised anybody shops there at all. Their lawyers are just like them.
James says
Sleezy, not sleepy.
Brian Van Ausdle says
Well here’s my spin, you may not like what I have to say, Wal mart isn’t totally responsible, why? Hers why. They are the money that’s the reason. Tragic as this is it’s the truth.
Walmart did not cause the accident a little personal responsibility and limited liability
needs to be had sue,sue, sue that’s all we do. There are others involved in this , but lawyers go to the money but the actual trucking company and the driver are in this too. It was an accident that shouldn’t have happened, but it did. Can’t blame Walmart 100%
Bigred says
You’re right, your not an expert. Typical language of a legal filing at this stage of a case falls into the style of, it’s not my fault, if it is my fault, it’s also their fault, and so on. If Morgan and friends were not using legally required or available safety devices and it can be shown to contribute to their injuries, then Walmart will have to pay less. Doesn’t absolve them, just reduces the liability. Walmart is a totally reprehensible company in so many ways that this is tiny potatoes!
jerri says
I agree totally with brian. True there was an accident. People forget the limo driver was the only one wasn’t hurt. Because he was wearing his seat belt. I agree with Wal-Mart. They said yea true they may have gotten hurt but the probability of life threatening injury could have been diminished just by wearing a simple seatbelt. I hate somebody died but if he wore his seatbelt he may or may not still be alive. Nobody can ever no the true facts of this accident. The press have made this truck driver a villain. I no every trucker has sped through work zone at one time but u didn’t get caught up like this driver did. I only heard about it because an not very good comedian got hit. I c accidents all the time some are fatalities but it didn’t make national news.
bart van buskirk says
-This is what you get-people had an accident-follow the meaning of the word-its not who got injured its who’s getting paid ..The easy answer is everyone’ who pays the everyone its welfare..
steve r says
I read in another article that the truck driver would drive 700 miles to begin his shift and was likely up over 24 hours that day without sleep. Whether it was the same day of the accident as his first day of his work week it didnt say. However He reportedly said it is a common occurrence to run drivers like that. So I wonder about Elogs possibly playing a part in these types of accidents. Since any company can “correct” any problems like creating 8 hour sleeper break out of previous hours so driver can roll,( a friend of mine’s company did that to him after shuffling trailers at a customer for few hours then off duty driving an hour to the next one to shuffle trailers till his load was ready) can they alter the drivers logs to make it look like the driver violated HOS even if dispatch was legal?
It is easy to imagine that with the ability to “correct” logs remotely by satellites happening on a regular basis as accidents happen. Computer detects near instant highway to zero drop in speed and assumes an accident happened and alerts dispatch to review logs to see if “mistakes” need a “correction”. This defeats the purpose of why logs were first created in 1929 to prevent companies from over working exhausted drivers mainly because only the company can be “creative” with Elogs.
frankie says
you can’t edit drive time!! most anything else, yes.
DontTredOnMe says
Actually the company CAN edit drive time but the driver cannot. However, edits done both by the driver and the company on any line flag in the log as an edit so if a company changed things without the drivers knowledge or consent there is at least a data trail.
steve says
No getting creative with logs was necessary here. The 700 miles you referenced were in his car, which is off duty. This is the biggest flaw in the HOS. One can be awake and off duty, thereby being compliant, yet fatigued, but if you leave 15 minutes too early, after a sound sleep, you are not compliant, and in violation of HOS laws, yet well rested.
Jenn says
So if they were wearing seat belts the driver wouldn’t have fallen asleep at the wheel and the truck would have never collided with the limo? Wow, didn’t know wearing seat belts in one vehicle affects the awareness of others in their vehicles. See the ludicrousness in the argument Walmart is making yet?
Ryan says
Re-read it, Jenn. That’s not what they said.
DWM says
That was a sarcastic statement, Hero, read it again!
texastrucker says
I hate to say it to all of you but seat belt or no if you get hit with 80K lbs moving at any speed death is possible. Walmart is just ducking their responsibility insurance should cover most of it their just hoping there is nothing left for them to pick up on the end.
Tanya Bons says
I honestly feel for the people and families involved in this tragedy, loss of life is always horrific. When truck driver’s have an accident they are put under a microscope for everything, including unsafe operating and illegal activities so any commercial driver should be susceptible to the same scrutiny. The limo driver wore his seat belt, as is required by law. The California law states that seat belts are mandatory UNLESS riding in the back of a limo or cab; the passengers were not required to wear seat belts and should not be considered at fault for not wearing them. Blaming the passengers for not wearing safety belts is the equivalent of saying that they should have been wearing knee pads, helmets and extra padding, it is not a substantial complaint. If there is no requirement to be met, why is this even an issue? If we want to discuss safety precautions that COULD (not should) have been taken I’m certain that there could be a page of items for each vehicle/person. As much as I hate seeing truck drivers roasted for an accident, I still think the obvious should prevail here.
missjanenc says
1) The accident didn’t occur in CA, but in NJ where everyone is compelled to wear seatbelts.
2) The injuries sustained by Tracy Morgan would have been less severe had he buckled up.
3) The obvious is not always the law.
hardwurkindaddy says
I find it funny that all these folks think so little of Wal-Mart, yet the company is one of the largest in the world…apparently somebody likes them…
inthespirit says
Well said – yet, it seems the people who don’t like Wal-Mart are the ones who had
a problem and it wasn’t settled to their satisfaction. I watched an old lady trying to
return candy. Try it, see if you get your money back. She didn’t.
missjanenc says
Some of you seem to forget that the job of an attorney is to represent his client and fight for them to the best of their ability so they can earn the big bucks they were paid. As an example, look at some of those far out stories woven by attorneys during murder trials even though their clients may have been caught in the act.
Walmart didn’t cause the accident but they’re the ones with the deep pockets and whose name is on the truck.
And as far as I’m concerned, Tracy Morgan is a moron. No where is it stated that he is being blamed for the accident as he claims, but he certainly could have mitigated his injuries had he worn a seatbelt, which is the law, and would have prevented him from being hurled like a ragdoll upon impact.
Ray says
Far be it from a multi-billion dollar company to take responsibility for an accident their driver caused. They have money to spare, and they have to do this …
John S says
As if wearing a seat belt means its OK for a WalMart truck to hit you? Shame on Tracy Morgan for riding in a limo and not wearing his seat belt. Folks this comes from the sleaze bag lawyers Walmart hired to try and place blame partially on the Morgan party. Its shameful but its what lawyers do.
Rob S says
One word, “Rollocks”
Craig Gallagher says
It’s shared responsibility the driver and the occupants of the limo for not wearing their seat belts that are mandatory in nj. It’s a high visibility money grab being fueled by greedy lowlife lawyers . How about Tracy Lawrence using his status to promote seat belt use and public safety not add to his dwindling bank account like his one time fame. Wonder how this would be going if it was john public no name involved, lawyers actors politicians they are all in the same group that lines their pockets by exploiting others.
Mike Blanche says
This is in a pleading in the case. They HAVE to make this case now, if they are going to bring it up later in court in an attempt to mitigate damages. Walmart’s lawyers would be liable for negligence if they didn’t. If you read Tracy Morgan’s lawyers pleading, they essentially claim that Walmart and their drivers are the spawn of the devil. This stuff is boilerplate that just goes according to form. My bet is the case will never come to court.
DWM says
Wal-Mart is losing there appeal even to shoppers, me being one of them. I refuse to shop there, because of the way they treat their employees, and their advertising tactics. But I now have another reason, and this is a damn good reason for everyone else to boycott them as well!!!
Thill says
Walmart is truly an evil empire they take advantage of the country and have bankrupt the majority of companies that get involved with them. I refuse to shop there. If you do the research you will be amazed at how many companies they have destroyed. My wife worked for three different companies that ended up involved with Walmart and they all went belly up.
Dave W says
The reason they are using the seatbelt as a defense is to limit there liability. So lets say without that defense they pay 250 million with that defense it only cost them 60 million. That is a big savings for Walmart.
Hamburger71 says
I still haven’t figured out how Wal-Mart is responsible in any way. The driver, as far as they knew, was good. He should have known better, its his fault the accident occurred. If the passengers weren’t wearing wearing their belts, they are not at fault for the accident, but for the severity of their injuries. None of this is the fault of Wal-Mart.
Bill says
This is what happens once lawyers get involved. Anything to shift blame. Like when the lawyers for Tracy Morgan said Wal-Mart should have known their driver was tired. How the hell could they possibly know that? The driver reported to work as scheduled. It is ridiculous to think any company is going to screen every driver and assess whether or not they are fatigued when they come on a shift after a day off. The fault of the driver being tired is the fault of the driver. He was operating within the HOS regs and that should be all you can expect of Wal-Mart.
Bo says
there is no excuse to rear end anyone I have drove for 40 years seen accident after accident when your in a big rig you have to drive not only for you but for the other person to because a person that’s not ever been in a big rig doesn’t know you can”t stop on a dime and that 80,000 lbs is a missile even at 40mph I feel for the people that was hurt and lost there lives it don’t matter if that person was famous or homeless it was a human being that the only way there family cant visit them is at the cemetery children lose parents everyday because some idiot was on the phone or plays with a lap top while driving I see it everyday people don’t care how they drive anymore its every person for themselves truckers or motorist Wal-Mart is wrong this driver was out of hours should not have been behind the wheel to start with if these insurance companies was smart they would hire ex-drivers to look into these accidents not someone that knows nothing about a truck Wal-Mart has gotten way to BIG FOR THERE BRITCHES —— DO THE RIGHT THING there safety department needs to do a better job but you know when you give your out of work brother-in law or your idiot cousin a job because no one else would hire him because he”s a idiot just to have a check so you don”t have to give him money and momma said hire him this is what happens I hope they win and cut Wal-Mart down a notch they need some air let out of there sails
Ray says
The driver works for Wal-Mart which makes Wal-Mart responsible. That’s the way it is.
Jc says
The accident would have happened either way. But the argument is going to come into play when a payout for this happens. Walmart will pay . But the other party were not doing what they should have been doing on the road either , ( safety belts ) so that will come into play when $$$$ are awarded. Maybe , maybe they they wouldn’t have been injured as bad if they had been wearing belts. Yes they would have been in accident , yes they would most likely been injured to some degree is unknown. But what also is unknown is , perhaps one of the dead would be alive if they had their belts on. That’s the other lesson here. Tracy Morgan says they weren’t doing anything wrong. You weren’t wearing belts Tracy . And why should you.? In case a tired truck driver slams into you. Maybe it will save your life. Take some responsibility .
Jan says
It was not Walmart’s fault it was the driver who was responsible. But I’m sure he wasn’t worth billions so obviously Walmart gets sued. No one let me repeat NO ONE can force me to drive if I feel I can not do it safely. Therefore if I cause an accident it is my fault.
Jude Ossowski says
How many times have truck drivers received tickets for not using seatbelts so the trooper could see them? If the people injured or killed in this wreck failed to take all available precautions, then, as I see it, they are at least partly responsible for their injuries. Who can say what damage would have been done or what injuries would have been suffered if seat belts had ben worn? Everything that happens is the result of everything else that happened prior to it.