The federal underride guard standard that applied to the trailer your vehicle slid under in Bay St. Louis has not been meaningfully updated since 1998. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration first proposed strengthening the rear underride guard standard in the 1990s. The standard that emerged required guards rated to absorb 22,241 pounds of force in the center of the guard. That sounds like a lot until you understand that a full-size passenger SUV striking a trailer at highway speed generates forces that can exceed that rating by a factor of three or more. The insurance industry and the trucking industry have known for decades that the 1998 standard does not prevent passenger vehicle occupants from sliding under the trailer at speeds above 35 miles an hour. The IIHS has published crash test data showing exactly what happens. The carrier whose trailer you went under chose a guard that met the 1998 minimum. They were not required to do better. That is the argument they will make. It is not the only argument in your case.

I am Jay Foster. I have been practicing in Hancock County for decades. Underride cases in the Bay St. Louis corridor split into two categories. In rear underride cases, the most common type, your vehicle slides under the back of a trailer that was stopped in your path. In side underride cases, your vehicle goes under the side of a trailer during a turn or a lane change. The federal guard standards are different for each type, and neither standard is adequate by current engineering knowledge. Whether the carrier in your case used a guard that met even the inadequate minimum, and whether a better guard was commercially available and cost-effective at the time the trailer was manufactured, are questions the trailer’s specifications and the NHTSA rulemaking history answer. I look at both in every underride case in Hancock County.

Bay St. Louis Underride Truck Accident Lawyer: Rear Guard And Side Guard Standards And Why They Matter To Your Case

Federal rear underride guard requirements under 49 C.F.R. Part 393.86 apply to trailers with a gross vehicle weight rating over 10,000 pounds manufactured after January 26, 1998. The standard requires a guard attached to the rear of the trailer that can withstand 22,241 pounds of force at the center and 11,120 pounds at each side. IIHS crash testing has demonstrated that guards meeting this standard fail at impact speeds as low as 35 miles an hour when the striking vehicle engages at an offset angle. A carrier whose trailer was manufactured with a guard that only meets the 1998 minimum, when guards capable of substantially better performance were commercially available, has made a choice about how much it values the lives of the people sharing the road with that trailer. Whether the specific guard on the trailer in your crash meets even the 1998 minimum is in the trailer’s inspection and maintenance records. A damaged or deformed guard that was not replaced is a maintenance negligence claim on top of the design argument.

Side underride guard standards are weaker than rear standards. Federal regulations do not require side underride protection on most commercial trailers. NHTSA proposed a side guard rule in 2015 and did not finalize it. A carrier operating a trailer with no side guard protection in a corridor where side underride crashes are a documented risk has made a design choice that the current inadequate regulatory minimum permits. Whether a side guard was commercially available for that trailer and whether the carrier had a duty to install one beyond the regulatory minimum is a products liability and negligence analysis that requires examining the trailer manufacturer’s options catalog and the carrier’s fleet specifications. I conduct that analysis in every side underride case in Hancock County.

The Highway 90 And I-10 Underride Corridor In Bay St. Louis

Rear underride crashes in Bay St. Louis concentrate on Highway 90 where trailers make delivery stops in travel lanes, and at the Exit 13 interchange where trailers slow from highway speed to surface road speed in a short distance. A trailer that stops or slows abruptly in a travel lane without adequate warning, in conditions where a following driver cannot see the trailer’s rear in time to stop, creates a rear underride condition. The trailer’s rear lighting and reflective tape, its guard height from the road surface, and the adequacy of the warning given before stopping are the first evidence categories I preserve in a Highway 90 rear underride case.

Side underride crashes in Bay St. Louis occur when a trailer makes a wide right turn on a Highway 90 intersection and the driver on the right side of the trailer has no warning that the trailer is sweeping toward their vehicle. The driver of the vehicle that goes under the trailer’s side is typically in a blind spot created by the trailer length and has no opportunity to react before the underride contact is made. The trailer’s side reflective tape, the adequacy of the driver’s turn signal use, and the carrier’s training protocol for wide turns in urban corridors are the evidence that drives this claim.

What Your Bay St. Louis Underride Case Is Actually Worth

MS law does not cap personal injury damages. Underride crashes produce some of the most severe injuries in commercial vehicle crashes. Traumatic brain injuries, decapitation injuries, and crush injuries to the upper body that result in permanent disability. Every medical dollar your injuries require. Lost wages and permanent reduction in earning capacity. Pain and suffering. In underride cases where the trailer’s guard did not meet even the 1998 federal minimum, or where the carrier knew the guard was damaged and failed to replace it, punitive damages under Miss. Code Ann. Section 11-1-65 are part of the argument. The call center never builds that argument because it requires examining the trailer’s maintenance records and the NHTSA rulemaking history, not settling against the driver’s employment policy and closing the file.

The Foster Fair Fee Guarantee: The Promise The TV Lawyer Cannot Match

The Foster Fair Fee Guarantee is a written contractual promise: the amount you put in your pocket when your case closes will always be more than the amount your lawyer puts in his. Always. Every case. No exceptions. Written into your contract before I do a single thing on your case. If the math does not work out right after expenses, the fee gets reduced until your number is higher. The crash test data on underride guard performance is public through the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

▼ Get Your FREE Book Right Now ▼
Fill Out The Form Below And I Will Send It Immediately

Bay St. Louis Underride Truck Accident Questions I Get Every Week

The Carrier Says Their Trailer Met The Federal Underride Guard Standard. Does That End My Case?

No. Meeting a minimum federal safety standard is a floor, not a ceiling, for negligence liability. MS negligence law asks whether the carrier acted reasonably under the circumstances, not merely whether it met the regulatory minimum. If guards capable of substantially better performance than the 1998 standard were commercially available at a reasonable cost, the carrier’s choice to use only the minimum may be evidence of unreasonable conduct even if it technically complied with federal law. There is also a separate question of whether the specific guard on the trailer in your crash actually met the minimum standard at the time of the crash, given its age, maintenance history, and any prior damage. A guard that met the standard when it was installed but was damaged and not replaced may not have met the standard on the day of your crash.

My Vehicle Went Under The Side Of A Trailer On Highway 90 In Bay St. Louis. Is There No Federal Standard For That?

Correct. Federal regulations do not currently require side underride guards on most commercial trailers. NHTSA proposed a side guard rule in 2015 but never finalized it. The absence of a federal mandate does not eliminate the carrier’s negligence liability for operating a trailer without side protection when side underride crashes are a documented risk in the specific operating environment. MS negligence law imposes a duty of reasonable care that may exceed the federal regulatory minimum. Whether a side guard was commercially available for that specific trailer configuration, and whether the carrier had a duty to install one based on industry knowledge about side underride risk, is a factual and legal question I evaluate in every side underride case in Hancock County.

The Trailer’s Rear Lights Were Working When The Crash Happened. Does That Help The Carrier?

Working lights are required but they are not sufficient to prevent every underride crash. A trailer stopped in a travel lane with working lights is still an underride hazard if the guard height allows a passenger vehicle to slide under it at the speed the following vehicle was traveling. The adequacy of the warning provided before stopping, the height of the guard from the road surface, and the impact resistance of the guard at the speed and angle of contact are separate questions from whether the lights were working. The carrier will use working lights as evidence of reasonable conduct. I use the guard specifications, the impact physics, and the commercial availability of better guard technology as the answer to that argument.

How Do I Find Out What Guard Standard Applied To The Specific Trailer That Hit Me In Bay St. Louis?

Through the trailer’s VIN and manufacturing records. The VIN identifies the year of manufacture, which determines which federal standard applied when the trailer was built. The trailer manufacturer’s specifications for that model show what guard was installed and what its rated capacity was. The carrier’s maintenance records for that specific trailer show whether the guard was inspected, whether any damage was noted, and whether any repairs were made. The pre-trip inspection report for the day of the crash shows the driver’s assessment of the guard condition before departure. All of those documents go into my preservation demand the day I take an underride case in Hancock County.

Can I Sue The Trailer Manufacturer For The Underride Guard Design In My Bay St. Louis Crash?

Possibly, if the guard design was defective or if the manufacturer knew a better design was available and chose not to implement it. A products liability claim against the trailer manufacturer runs independently of the negligence claim against the carrier. To succeed, you need to establish that the guard as designed was unreasonably dangerous, that a safer alternative design was feasible and commercially available, and that the defective design caused or contributed to your injuries. This is a different analysis from the carrier’s maintenance negligence claim, and it requires engineering expert analysis of the guard design and the crash biomechanics. I evaluate the products liability claim in every underride case where the guard failure appears to be a design issue rather than a maintenance issue.

The Trailer That My Vehicle Went Under Was Parked On The Side Of Highway 90 At Night. Is The Carrier Still Liable?

Yes, potentially. A trailer parked on the shoulder or in a travel lane at night is required under 49 C.F.R. Part 392.22 to display warning devices at specified distances to alert approaching traffic. If the driver or carrier failed to deploy those warning devices, that is a federal regulatory violation. The trailer is also required to have functioning rear marking lights and reflective tape under 49 C.F.R. Part 393. If those lighting and marking systems were not working, that is a maintenance negligence claim. And if the trailer’s guard did not meet the federal standard or had been damaged and not repaired, that is the same guard claim that applies in a moving underride crash. A parked trailer underride case has the same evidence picture as a moving trailer underride case. The preservation demand goes out the same day.

P.S. The trailer’s guard specifications and maintenance history are in the carrier’s records right now. The case manager does not know to demand them. I do. Those documents go into my preservation demand the day I take your case.