When a freight truck causes a catastrophic injury—leaving a victim in a coma or requiring long-term interdiction—the legal battle is won or lost in the first 48 hours. The case of Marable v. Empire Truck Sales illustrates the complexity of these claims, where multiple parties (the employer, the manufacturer, and the repair shop) all point fingers at one another.
A Defective Truck and a Catastrophic Injury
In this New Orleans case, a woman was dragged underneath a freight truck when it allegedly shifted into gear on its own. The injuries were so severe she was rendered comatose and required a legal curator (interdiction) to manage her lawsuit. This highlights a critical reality of 18-wheeler accidents: the physical evidence inside the truck is often more reliable than eyewitness testimony.
When a person is injured and left in a condition where they cannot handle their legal claims, their family may act on the incapacitated person’s behalf. If a family member is handling claims on behalf of the incapacitated, it is very important for them to find a good lawyer to help navigate the legal processes. The following appeal of a lawsuit arising out of New Orleans discusses what can occur when multiple lawsuits are filed as a result of disastrous injuries caused by an eighteen wheeler.
Connie Marable was injured in an accident when her husband’s freight truck allegedly shifted into gear and dragged her underneath the vehicle. Connie was rendered comatose and she was subsequently interdicted. Her husband, Wayne, was appointed as her curator. Wayne filed a lawsuit against Empire Truck Sales and its general manager Curtis Hudspeth in Orleans Parish Civil District Court on behalf of his wife. Wayne alleged that Empire’s faulty work or failure to work on the truck is what caused the accident which injured Connie.
The “Black Box”: Electronic Control Modules (ECM) and ELDs
To prove the truck shifted into gear “on its own,” an attorney must access the vehicle’s Electronic Control Module (ECM). In the logistics industry, these “Black Boxes” record:
- Pre-Collision Speed: How fast the truck was moving before impact.
- Braking Events: Did the driver attempt to stop?
- Gears & RMP: Was the truck properly shifted, or was there a mechanical failure?
- Hours of Service (ELD): Was the driver fatigued or violating federal “Hours of Service” laws?
Various motions were filed by the Defendants in this matter that ultimately lead to the dismissal of the Jones claims against DTNA and KLLM. After the dismissal, Mr. Jones filed a new lawsuit in which he reasserted claims against all of the defendants and added factual allegations against DTNA and KLLM in connection with the lack of safety interlocks and precautions on the truck.
DTNA and KLLM responded by filing exceptions of res judicata arguing a previous judgment issued by the trial court granting their motions for summary judgment and dismissing the claims with prejudice precluded Mr. Jones’ reasserted claims. See La. R.S. 13:4231.
Mr. Jones filed an opposition to the exceptions arguing that the claims that were dismissed were brought on behalf of the Jones plaintiffs, personally, and not on behalf of Connie. Mr. Jones further argued the claims could not have been on behalf of Connie, as Mr. Wayne was the only person who was legally able to make claims on her behalf at that time.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal first laid out the applicable standard to review an exception of “Res Judicata.” The Fourth Circuit stated ” The Louisiana Supreme Court has set forth five requirements that must be satisfied for a finding that a second action is precluded by res judicata: (1) the judgment is valid; (2) the judgment is final; (3) the parties are the same; (4) the cause or causes of action asserted in the second suit existed at the time of the final judgment in the first litigation; and (5) the cause or causes of action asserted in the second suit arose out of the transaction or occurrence that was the subject matter of the first litigation. ” Chevron USA, Inc. v. State,. The Fourth Circuit then focused on the narrow issue contained within the arguments of this case the “same parties” prong of the test.
The appeals court held that the “same parties” requirement was not satisfied in this case. The Court reasoned the record showed that the Jones plaintiffs represented at the hearing for the motions for summary judgment that they were there on behalf of themselves, and there was no mention of them representing Connie’s interest at that time. Mr. Jones was appointed as Connie’s co-curator later and at that point he was no longer prohibited from asserting claims on Connie’s behalf. Therefore, The Fourth Circuit held under these specific facts the trial court was correct in denying the DTNA and KLLM’s exceptions of res judicata.
Preventing “Spoliation”: The Duty to Preserve Evidence
In the Marable case, the lawsuit involved claims of “faulty work” and “defective design.” Without immediate intervention, trucking companies may repair or destroy the truck, losing this vital data forever. We send an immediate “Spoliation Letter” to the trucking company, legally demanding they preserve:
- ECM and Dashcam Data.
- Maintenance and Inspection Logs.
- The Driver’s Qualification File (DQF).
- Post-Accident Drug and Alcohol Test Results.
Overcoming Procedural Hurdles: Res Judicata and Interdiction
This case also dealt with Res Judicata (La. R.S. 13:4231)—a rule that prevents someone from suing over the same issue twice. Because the victim’s children filed suit before her curator did, the defense tried to get the case dismissed. Understanding these procedural traps is just as important as the evidence itself.
This case illustrates the complications that can occur when multiple lawsuits are filed asserting claims arising out of the same facts. In circumstances such as these it’s important that you have an excellent lawyer to make sure that a motion seeking res judicata doesn’t lead to an award of nada because of faulty pleadings.
If you or a loved one has suffered a catastrophic injury in a truck accident, every second counts. To see how our Rapid Response Team preserves ‘Black Box’ data before it’s deleted, visit our Louisiana Truck Accident Lawyer Practice Hub. or contact our office today at 504-521-6000.
Firm Notice: MDL 3171
The Berniard Law Firm is currently providing nationwide representation for Uber and Lyft sexual assault survivors following federal approval of MDL 3171.
Learn more about your rights and the 2026 legal standards.