Zatarain v. Swift Transp. Inc.

• Decision Date: 12 April 2011
• Docket Number: Case No. 2:09–cv–850–MEF.
• Parties: Joyce ZATARAIN, as Administratrix of the Estate of Coleman Zatarain, Deceased, Plaintiff,v.SWIFT TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama

776 F.Supp.2d 1282

Joyce ZATARAIN, as Administratrix of the Estate of Coleman Zatarain, Deceased, Plaintiff,

v.SWIFT TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al., Defendants.

Case No. 2:09–cv–850–MEF.

United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division.

April 12, 2011.

Brian Paul Strength, Attorney at Law, Jock Michael Smith, Valerie Dianne Rucker–Russell, Cochran, Cherry, Givens & Smith P.C., Tuskegee, AL, for Plaintiff.J. Craig Lewis, James C. Gray, III, Christopher Dale Cobb, Lloyd, Gray & Whitehead, P.C., Birmingham, AL, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

MARK E. FULLER, Chief Judge.

This cause is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. # 16), filed on January 6, 2011. On June 6, 2007, an automobile accident occurred on Highway 231 in Alabama that resulted in the death of Coleman Zatarain (“Zatarain”). Plaintiff, the Administratrix of Zatarain's estate, originally filed the instant action on May 26, 2009, in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama alleging the following state-law claims: (1) negligence against Dericka Blockett (“Blockett”) and Swift Transportation, Inc. (“Swift Transportation”) (collectively “Defendants”); (2) wantonness against Blockett and Swift; (3) negligent and/or wanton entrustment against Swift; (4) negligent hiring, training, retention, and supervision against Swift; and (5) wanton hiring, training, retention and supervision against Smith. (Doc. # 1 Ex. 1, State Ct. Compl. ¶¶ 7–25). Having removed the suit to this Court on September 8, 2009, (Doc. # 1), Defendants now seek summary judgment on the grounds that Plaintiff cannot establish negligence or wantonness and/or because Zatarain was contributorily negligent. (Doc. # 17). After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the Court finds that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. # 16), is due to be DENIED.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The Court exercises subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1332, based upon the parties' diversity of citizenship ¹ and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. The parties contest neither personal jurisdiction nor venue and the Court finds adequate grounds alleged to support both personal jurisdiction and venue.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. Facts

Blockett received his Commercial Driver's License (“CDL”) after graduating from driver training school in Millington, Tennesee. (Doc. # 17, at 3 ¶ 5 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 12:13–17)). According to Blockett, his CDL has never been suspended or revoked. (Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 8:4–7, 39:7–9). He also testified that, other than the accident at issue here, he has never been involved in another accident. (Doc. # 17, at 4 ¶ 7 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 34:7–13)). On July 15, 2005, Swift Transportation hired Blockett as a truck driver. ( Id. at 4 ¶ 11 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. E, Swift Transportation Driver Master)). At the time of the accident, Blockett was driving from Wynne, Arkansas to Albany, Georgia in an eighteen-wheel truck owned by Swift transportation. (Doc. # 25, at 2 (citing Doc. # 24 Ex. B, Blockett Dep. 13:21–24; Ex. C, Ritchie Dep. 114:19–23)). ²

Zatarain lived in Troy, Alabama while a student at Troy University. (Doc. # 17, at 3 ¶ 1; Doc. # 25, at 2). Prior to the accident, he had repeatedly traveled the relevant portion of Highway 231. (Doc. # 17, at 3 ¶ 3 (stating that Zatarain had traveled the Highway 231 route “at least one hundred times”); Doc. # 25, at 2 (agreeing that Zatarain had traveled the portion of Highway 231 where the accident occurred “many times”)). Around 12:40 a.m. on June 6, 2007, Zatarain was traveling towards Troy, Alabama on Highway 231 South when he collided with the rear of Blockett's truck near the intersection with Highway 82. (Doc. # 17, at 4 ¶ 14; Doc. # 25, at 2). Zatarain suffered fatal injuries from the accident and died. (Doc. # 1 Ex. 1, State Ct. Compl. ¶ 5). The accident occurred in a construction zone, with construction signs in the vicinity and a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour (“mph”). (Doc. # 17, at 6 ¶¶ 24–25 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. F, Hardy Dep. 12:16–22, 13:18–21; Ex. G, Frost Dep. 28:14–19, 29:9–19, 66:13–17); Doc. # 25, at 2).³ There was no minimum speed posted. (Doc. # 17, at 6 ¶ 32 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. G, Frost Dep. 62:21–63:1)). While the parties agree on these basic facts, they disagree on events leading up to the accident.

A. Blockett's Testimony

Defendants contend that “prior to the accident, Blockett had performed a pre-trip inspection, and that inspection revealed his truck and trailer were in good working order.” (Doc. # 17, at 4 ¶ 13 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 33:13–17)). At the time of the accident, Blockett claims that he was driving at a speed of 40 mph. ( Id. at 5 ¶ 21 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 17:13–16, 19:18–23, 43:20–22)).⁴ Blockett testified that he did not feel the impact of Zatarain's car striking his truck, but that he heard a “boom” and thought he had gotten a flat tire. ( Id. ¶ 15 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 17:20–18:19)). He stated that, although he did not immediately brake after the impact, he eased into the emergency lane as soon as he could. ( Id. ¶¶ 17–18 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 19:24–20:5)). After stopping his truck, Blockett then “saw ... Zatarain's vehicle lodged underneath his trailer.” ( Id. ¶ 19 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 20:12–14, 33:3–4)). Blockett claims that there was nothing he could have done to prevent the accident. ( Id. ¶ 20 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. C, Blockett Dep. 52:8–10)).

B. The Investigation by Corporal Hardy and Lieutenant Frost

Defendant emphasizes that Corporal Hardy and Lieutenant Frost both testified that Blockett told them that he was going approximately 40 mph at the time of the accident. ( Id. at 6 ¶ 29 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. F, Hardy Dep. 15:14–23, 19:23–20:5; Ex. G, Frost Dep. 31:13–22)). Lieutenant Frost measured 60 feet of skid marks left by Zatarain braking. (Doc. # 18 Ex. 5, Frost Dep. 27:7–10). He also measured 294 feet of drag marks resulting from the truck continuing to drive with the car lodged underneath it. ( Id. 25:23–26:9). “Using Blockett's speed of 40 mph, Lieutenant Frost calculated [that] ... Zatarain's vehicle was travelling [sic] 68 mph pre-skid.” (Doc. # 17, at 6 ¶ 30 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. G, Frost Dep. 31:2–4)). Lieutenant Frost also stated that, prior to where the accident occurred on Highway 231, the line of sight would have been a half mile or more. ( Id. ¶ 31 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. G, Frost Dep. 21:3–8)).

Plaintiff points out that Lieutenant Frost admitted to making no scientific calculation of the Swift Transportation truck's speed. (Doc. # 25, at 4 (citing Doc. # 24 Ex. E, Frost Dep. 61:14–22)). Indeed, Lieutenant Frost testified that he was unable to prove or disprove whether the truck was stopped in the road. ( See Doc. # 24 Ex. E, Frost Dep. 71:6–7). Finally, Plaintiff emphasizes that Lieutenant Frost's and Corporal Hardy's conclusions that Zatarain was speeding and inattentive were based on Blockett's statements that he was traveling about 40 mph. “When asked whether it was possible that the truck was stopped in the road, [Lieutenant] Frost testified, ‘I can't prove he wasn't, I couldn't prove he was either.’ ” that he could not prove whether the truck was stopped in the road or not. (Doc. # 24 Ex. E, Frost Dep. 71:4–7).

C. The Experts

i. Defendants' Experts

Defendants retained two alleged experts. The first is Michael Loop (“Loop”), whom Defendants describe as a “human factors expert.” (Doc. # 17, at 7 ¶ 36). Loop has a Ph.D. in psychology and has both taught and researched in various fields, including vision sciences or physiological optics. (Doc. # 18 Ex. H, Defendants' Rule 26 Expert Disclosures). Loop testified that he “inspected a Swift [Transportation] trailer, similar to the one operated by Blockett, on November 5, 2010 at 5:15 [a.m.] at the Cordova, Alabama entrance ramp for Corridor X.” (Doc. # 17, at 8 ¶ 38 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. I, Loop Dep. 12:14–18)). “The purpose of inspecting the Swift trailer was to get some photographs and some light measurements off of the back of the Swift trailer being illuminated only by the headlights of a vehicle behind it.” (Doc. # 18 Ex. I, Loop Dep. 13:20–14:1). After taking these measurements at 60 feet and 209 feet using his car's low and high beams, Loop determined that the truck should have been visible for the actual measured distance of the line of sight and that it would have been unmistakable that they were the lights of an eighteen-wheeler truck. ( Id. 25:4–12).

Defendants also retained Allen Powers (“Powers”) as an “accident reconstruction expert.” (Doc. # 17, at 7 ¶ 36). Powers has a Masters degree in Mechanical Engineering and “has been involved in accident reconstruction for over 25 years.” (Doc. # 18 Ex. H, Defendants' Rule 26 Expert Disclosures). Powers and another engineer, Garrett Davis, “inspected and measured the accident scene and ... Zatarain's vehicle” in order to determine the Delta V for Zatarain's car. (Doc. # 17, at 8–9 ¶¶ 43, 45 (citing Doc. # 18 Ex. J, Powers Dep. 40:10, 47:9–21)). “The Delta V is the change in longitudinal velocity of the [car] as a result of the impact.” ( Id. at 9 ¶ 45). Powers calculated that the Delta V for Zatarain's car was 29 to 34 mph”, meaning that the difference in speeds between Zatarain's car and Blockett's trailer at the time of impact was somewhere between 29 and 34 mph. ( Id. ¶¶ 45–46; see also Doc. # 18 Ex. J, Powers Dep. 102:5–10).⁵ Thus, Defendants contend that, at the time of impact, Blockett was traveling at 40 mph while Zatarain was traveling at 69 to 74 mph. Taking into account Blockett's statements that he was traveling at 40 mph and the Delta V of 29 to 34, Powers estimated the pre-skid speed of Zatarain's car would be in...