Penske request for en banc hearing gets pushback from victim’s estate

In a federal appellate case involving companies within the Penske network, both sides have presented their arguments to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case concerns whether the Fifth Circuit should grant an en banc hearing, a matter of significant concern for the trucking industry due to its potential impact on liability for broker and carrier responsibility.

The plaintiffs in the case, linked to the estate of Lyndon Dean Meyer who died in a 2018 truck accident, recently submitted a brief arguing against an en banc hearing. This case arose after the Penske companies had previously won on liability at the district court level in the Southern District of Texas, only for the Fifth Circuit to overturn that decision.

The accident occurred when a truck, part of a multi-step process that began with Penske Logistics, collided with Meyer's vehicle on Highway 202 in Bee County, Texas. The dispute centers around control, with the Penske companies claiming they were unaware of the complex chain of brokers involved before the final crash. The key issue is whether Penks Logistics, the initial carrier, can be held vicariously liable for the actions of the driver, Satnam Singh Lehal, who caused the accident.

The plaintiffs oppose the en banc request, arguing that the "Control Statute and Regulations" clearly impose vicarious liability on a motor carrier that uses non-owned vehicles under an arrangement with another party. They contend that if Penske had not known about the driver's actions, it was due to its own failure to comply with the statutory and regulatory duties.

The Fifth Circuit's decision aligns with the statutory text and regulations, which were enacted to prevent the type of abuse that Penske seeks to perpetuate.