Trucking / Commercial Vehicle Accident Complaint

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (COMMERCIAL TRUCK COLLISION) — COLORADO

DISTRICT COURT, [COUNTY] COUNTY, COLORADO

Court Address: [COURT STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP]

Attorney for Plaintiff: [LAW FIRM NAME] — [ATTORNEY NAME], Atty. Reg. # [____] — [STREET ADDRESS, CITY, CO ZIP] — Phone [(___) ___-____] — Email [____________]

Case No.: [____________] — Division: [____] — Courtroom: [____]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (COMMERCIAL TRUCK COLLISION) AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF FULL LEGAL NAME] ("Plaintiff"), by and through undersigned counsel, alleges against Defendants as follows:

1. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff is, and at all relevant times was, an individual residing in [COUNTY] County, Colorado.

2. Defendant [DEFENDANT DRIVER FULL LEGAL NAME] ("Defendant Driver") is, on information and belief, an individual residing in [COUNTY / STATE] who, at all relevant times, held or was required to hold a commercial driver's license (CDL) and operated the subject commercial motor vehicle (the "Tractor-Trailer"). Defendant Driver may be served at [SERVICE ADDRESS].

3. Defendant [DEFENDANT MOTOR CARRIER FULL LEGAL NAME] ("Defendant Carrier") is, on information and belief, a [corporation / limited liability company] organized under the laws of [STATE] and authorized to do and doing business in Colorado as a motor carrier, holding USDOT No. [__________] and Motor Carrier (MC) No. [__________]. At all relevant times Defendant Carrier owned, leased, dispatched, controlled, and/or maintained the Tractor-Trailer and employed or contracted with Defendant Driver. Defendant Carrier may be served through its registered agent, [REGISTERED AGENT NAME AND ADDRESS].

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Colo. Const. art. VI, § 9 and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-1-124 because the tort occurred in Colorado and the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional limit of the County Court.

5. Venue is proper in this County under C.R.C.P. 98(c) because the Collision occurred here and/or one or more Defendants resides or has its principal place of business here.

6. Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 8(a), Plaintiff does not plead a specific dollar amount of damages but avers that the claims are not subject to the simplified procedure of C.R.C.P. 16.1.

7. This action is timely commenced within the three-year limitations period for tort actions arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle prescribed by Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-80-101(1)(n).

2. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

8. On or about [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was lawfully operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] vehicle traveling [DIRECTION] on [ROADWAY / HIGHWAY] at or near [CROSS-STREET / MILE MARKER / LANDMARK], in [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Colorado (the "Collision").

9. At the same time and place, Defendant Driver was operating the Tractor-Trailer — a [tractor-trailer / semi / commercial motor vehicle] with a gross vehicle weight rating in excess of [16,001 / 26,001] pounds — in the course and scope of his/her employment or agency with Defendant Carrier and in furtherance of Defendant Carrier's business.

10. The Collision occurred when Defendant Driver [DESCRIBE MANNER — e.g., made an unsafe lane change into Plaintiff's lane; failed to stop and rear-ended Plaintiff's vehicle; made a wide right turn ("squeeze play") across Plaintiff's path; failed to yield; lost control of the trailer; jackknifed; ran a traffic control; was traveling at an unsafe speed for conditions; drifted from the travel lane due to fatigue].

11. At all relevant times Plaintiff operated his/her vehicle in a lawful, careful, and prudent manner and did nothing to cause or contribute to the Collision.

12. As a direct and proximate result of the Collision, Plaintiff suffered severe, painful, and permanent bodily injuries, including but not limited to [DESCRIBE — e.g., orthopedic fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal injury, internal injuries, disfigurement].

13. Because of the immense disparity in size, weight, and force between a loaded commercial truck and a passenger vehicle, the Collision caused Plaintiff to suffer injuries materially more severe than those typically sustained in a collision between two passenger vehicles.

14. Following the Collision, [the Colorado State Patrol / the [CITY] Police Department] responded and [cited Defendant Driver for violation of C.R.S. § [SECTION] / prepared a traffic crash report].

15. All injuries and damages alleged were the foreseeable, natural, and probable consequence of Defendants' conduct.

3. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF — NEGLIGENCE

(Against Defendant Driver)

16. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though fully restated herein.

17. Defendant Driver owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise the heightened degree of care required of a professional commercial driver, including the duties to obey the Colorado traffic laws, to keep a proper lookout, to maintain control of the Tractor-Trailer, to drive at a safe speed for conditions, to maintain a safe following distance and space cushion, to inspect the vehicle before operation, and to refrain from driving while fatigued, distracted, or impaired.

18. Defendant Driver breached these duties by, among other things: (a) failing to keep a proper lookout and maintain control; (b) making an unsafe lane change or turning movement; (c) following too closely; (d) operating at an unsafe speed for conditions; (e) failing to yield; (f) driving while fatigued and/or beyond permitted hours of service; (g) driving while distracted, inattentive, or impaired; and (h) failing to perform an adequate pre-trip inspection.

19. Defendant Driver's breaches were the direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

4. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF — VICARIOUS LIABILITY / RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR

(Against Defendant Carrier)

20. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though fully restated herein.

21. At the time of the Collision, Defendant Driver was the employee, agent, statutory employee, and/or borrowed servant of Defendant Carrier and was operating the Tractor-Trailer within the course and scope of that employment or agency and in furtherance of Defendant Carrier's business.

22. Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, Defendant Carrier is liable for the negligence of Defendant Driver alleged herein.

23. Independently, as a federally regulated motor carrier, Defendant Carrier is responsible for the operation of the Tractor-Trailer and may not delegate away its nondelegable safety duties under 49 C.F.R. Part 390; a carrier-controlled or placarded vehicle is operated as the carrier's own under the FMCSR, and any lease or owner-operator arrangement does not relieve Defendant Carrier of liability.

5. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF — NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION, RETENTION & ENTRUSTMENT

(Against Defendant Carrier)

24. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though fully restated herein.

25. Defendant Carrier owed Plaintiff and the motoring public an independent duty to use reasonable care to hire, qualify, train, supervise, and retain competent and safe drivers, and to entrust its commercial vehicles only to drivers it knew or should have known were qualified, competent, and fit.

26. Defendant Carrier breached these duties by, among other things:

• Hiring and retaining Defendant Driver despite a record or indicators of incompetence, unfitness, prior collisions, moving violations, hours-of-service violations, or substance abuse that a reasonable carrier would have discovered through the investigation required by 49 C.F.R. § 391.23;
• Failing to obtain, verify, and maintain a complete driver qualification (DQ) file as required by 49 C.F.R. §§ 391.51 and 391.21;
• Failing to adequately train and supervise Defendant Driver in safe commercial-vehicle operation, hours-of-service compliance, and fatigue management;
• Failing to enforce hours-of-service limits and to monitor Defendant Driver's logs and electronic logging device (ELD) records;
• Failing to implement and enforce a compliant drug- and alcohol-testing program under 49 C.F.R. Part 382; and
• Entrusting the Tractor-Trailer to Defendant Driver when Defendant Carrier knew or should have known he/she was likely to operate it in a dangerous manner.

27. Defendant Carrier's negligence in these respects was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF — NEGLIGENT MAINTENANCE

(Against Defendant Carrier)

28. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though fully restated herein.

29. Defendant Carrier owed a duty to systematically inspect, repair, and maintain the Tractor-Trailer in safe operating condition — including its brakes, tires, lighting, steering, coupling devices, and load-securement systems — in accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 396 and applicable Colorado regulations (8 CCR 1507-1).

30. Defendant Carrier breached this duty by failing to inspect, repair, and maintain the Tractor-Trailer; by permitting it to be operated with defective or out-of-service conditions; and by failing to maintain accurate maintenance and inspection records.

31. Defendant Carrier's negligent maintenance was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

7. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF — NEGLIGENCE PER SE (FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS)

(Against All Defendants)

32. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though fully restated herein.

33. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR), 49 C.F.R. Parts 382–397, govern the operation of commercial motor vehicles and motor carriers. Colorado adopts and enforces these standards through Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-4-235, which prohibits operating a commercial vehicle on Colorado highways except in compliance with the minimum safety standards adopted by the Chief of the Colorado State Patrol, codified at 8 Colo. Code Regs. 1507-1, which incorporate the FMCSR for both interstate and intrastate carriers.

34. At the time of the Collision, Defendant Driver and/or Defendant Carrier violated one or more provisions of the FMCSR enacted to protect the class of persons that includes Plaintiff against the type of harm Plaintiff suffered, including but not limited to:

• 49 C.F.R. Part 395 — hours of service; driving while fatigued or beyond permitted driving/on-duty limits; false, incomplete, or non-compliant records of duty status or ELD records;
• 49 C.F.R. Part 391 — driver qualification and CDL standards; permitting an unqualified or medically unfit driver to operate the vehicle;
• 49 C.F.R. Part 382 — controlled-substances and alcohol use and testing, including the duty to conduct post-accident testing;
• 49 C.F.R. Part 396 — inspection, repair, and maintenance; operating a vehicle in a known unsafe or out-of-service condition;
• 49 C.F.R. Part 392 — driving of commercial motor vehicles, including the prohibition on operating while ill, fatigued, or impaired; and
• [OTHER FMCSR PROVISION OR COLORADO TRAFFIC STATUTE APPLICABLE].

35. Plaintiff is within the class of persons these regulations and statutes were designed to protect, and the Collision and Plaintiff's injuries are the type of harm they were designed to prevent.

36. Defendants' violations constitute negligence per se under Colorado law and were a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

8. DAMAGES

37. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff has sustained and will continue to sustain the following, in amounts subject to proof at trial:

• Past and future medical, hospital, surgical, rehabilitative, and pharmaceutical expenses;
• Future care and life-care needs, including anticipated surgeries and attendant care;
• Past and future physical pain and suffering;
• Past and future mental anguish and emotional distress;
• Permanent physical impairment and/or disfigurement;
• Past and future lost earnings and diminished earning capacity;
• Property damage, including diminution in value and loss of use; and
• Prejudgment and postjudgment interest as provided by law (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-101).

38. Plaintiff seeks all allowable economic, noneconomic, and physical-impairment damages, subject to applicable statutory limits, including Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-102.5.

39. If the evidence demonstrates that any Defendant's conduct was attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or willful and wanton conduct, Plaintiff will seek leave to amend to add exemplary damages pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-102, subject to statutory limitations.

9. SPOLIATION / EVIDENCE-PRESERVATION DEMAND

40. Plaintiff hereby demands that Defendants, and each of them, immediately preserve and not alter, destroy, overwrite, discard, or allow to be lost the following categories of evidence, the loss of which would prejudice Plaintiff and may give rise to sanctions, including an adverse-inference instruction:

• The electronic logging device (ELD) and all hours-of-service records, records of duty status, and supporting documents (49 C.F.R. Parts 395, 396);
• The engine control module (ECM) / event data recorder ("black box") and all telematics, GPS, and onboard-camera data from the Tractor-Trailer;
• Driver logs, trip reports, fuel and toll receipts, bills of lading, dispatch and communication records, and the driver's cellular-telephone records;
• The complete driver qualification (DQ) file, employment application, driving record, road-test and certification records, and prior-employer safety-performance inquiries (49 C.F.R. Part 391);
• All maintenance, inspection, and repair records, including driver vehicle inspection reports (DVIRs) (49 C.F.R. Part 396);
• The results of any post-accident drug and alcohol testing of Defendant Driver and the carrier's testing-program records (49 C.F.R. Part 382); and
• The Tractor-Trailer and trailer themselves, in their post-Collision condition, for joint inspection and download.

41. This demand is a continuing one. Defendants are on notice that the foregoing evidence is relevant to this action and must be preserved pending discovery.

10. COMPARATIVE-FAULT NOTE

42. Pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111, any negligence attributable to Plaintiff shall diminish Plaintiff's recovery in proportion to such negligence but shall not bar recovery unless Plaintiff's negligence is as great as the negligence of the party against whom recovery is sought. Plaintiff exercised due care at all relevant times.

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that judgment enter in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants as follows:

A. For all economic, noneconomic, and physical-impairment damages proven at trial;
B. For exemplary damages as and if permitted by law;
C. For prejudgment and postjudgment interest at the statutory rate;
D. For costs as allowed under C.R.C.P. 54(d) and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-16-104; and
E. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

12. JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of six persons on all issues so triable, pursuant to Colo. Const. art. II, § 23 and C.R.C.P. 38.

13. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Respectfully submitted this [____] day of [_______________], 20[____].

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Atty. Reg. # [____]

Attorney for Plaintiff

14. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-80-101(1)(n) (three-year limitations — motor-vehicle torts) — https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-13/
• Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-111 (comparative negligence — 50% bar); § 13-21-111.5 (pro rata / several liability; nonparty designation)
• Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-102 (exemplary damages; § 13-21-102(1.5) — may not be pleaded in initial complaint); § 13-21-102.5 (limit on noneconomic damages)
• Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-4-235 (minimum safety standards for commercial vehicles; adoption of FMCSR; CSP rulemaking authority) — https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/title-42/
• 8 Colo. Code Regs. 1507-1 (Colorado State Patrol — Rules and Regulations Concerning Minimum Standards for the Operation of Commercial Vehicles) — https://csp.colorado.gov/
• 49 C.F.R. Part 382 (controlled substances/alcohol testing); Part 391 (driver qualification / CDL); Part 392 (driving of CMVs); Part 395 (hours of service); Part 396 (inspection, repair, and maintenance); Part 390 (general; nondelegable carrier duties) — https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49
• Colo. Const. art. VI, § 9; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-1-124 (District Court jurisdiction)
• C.R.C.P. 8 (pleading), 38 (jury), 54(d) (costs), 98(c) (venue), 121 § 1-26 (e-filing signature)

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Colorado must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.