Watch Now


Nuclear verdict alert: More than $16M awarded in Georgia court

Company and insurer offer was $2 million, but rejection led to a trial

Latest nuclear verdict in trucking is out of Georgia. (Photo: Shutterstock)

If the definition of a nuclear verdict in trucking is more than $10 million, there is a new entry on the list of court actions topping that amount.

A jury in DeKalb County State Court in Georgia awarded Avnish Dalal $16.6 million on Dec. 14 in a case filed against Brown Trucking. 

Romi Jayswal of the firm of Deochand & Jayswal told FreightWaves the move to a jury trial came after a “disputed liability, where the offer from the trucking company was about $2 million.” Jayswal said the $2 million offer was not received until the trial was about to begin.

He said Dalal was 21 at the time of the accident in August 2021. It left him with physical injuries and limited mobility even after “several” surgeries. Dalal also suffered a traumatic brain injury “which has affected his life,” Jayswal said.

“I think the insurers and the trucking company pretty much took a stance where they saw basically no fault on the part of their own truck driver,” Jayswal said. “They took the stance that they did nothing wrong, which is why it ended up at trial.”

Reporting by the Courtroom View Network (CVN) from the courtroom trial site in Decatur, Georgia, said jurors assigned 60% liability to Brown and 40% to Dalal. 


The CVN reporting described the incident as beginning with truck driver Ebans Tshongwe of Brown stopping his truck on I-285 to avoid a van that was moving through Tshongwe’s lane. Dalal was riding behind the truck. He said he swerved to avoid the Brown truck but did collide with it, hit another truck and then went under the Brown truck. 

Reporting on the closing statement from Brown’s lawyer, John Dixon, the CVN article said Dixon presented video and data evidence “that he said showed Tshongwe acted appropriately under the circumstances to avoid striking the van.”

Dixon did not respond to an email sent by FreightWaves.

“Dixon added that Tshongwe did not have time to safely evaluate other potential alternative maneuvers as the van passed through his lane,” according to the CVN article. “Meanwhile, Dixon argued, Dalal was following trailing traffic too closely.”

The counterargument presented by attorneys from the firm of Fried Goldberg, according to the CVN reporting, was that “Tshongwe broke industry standards in failing to apply his brakes as soon as the truck’s acoustic warning system indicated the van passing into his lane. And Goldberg added Tshongwe compounded that error by failing to accelerate once the van left the lane.” Fried Goldberg represented Dalal along with Deochand & Jayswal.

Andy Marquis, a partner with the trucking-focused Scopelitis law firm, said while the $10 million number is an accepted definition of a nuclear verdict, the reality is “$15 million doesn’t even bat an eye too much.”

A more important guideline, Marquis said, is the relationship between the medical costs of a plaintiff in a trucking accident and the legal payout. A payout of $1 million in a case with medical costs that might top out at $10,000 would be a nuclear verdict to Marquis’ way of thinking.

And while the immediate medical costs with Dalal were estimated to be about $900,000, Marquis said the fact that there are brain injuries to a 21-year-old does portend a lifetime of significant medical expenses. “I’m not even sure that anybody would try real hard to say, ‘Gosh, that’s excessive,’” Marquis said.

More articles by John Kingston

9th Circuit panel will hear Uber/Postmates case on AB5

Court kills CARB’s reefer truck fee but refrigeration unit rules intact

Haslam payments to Pilot execs won’t be an issue in Berkshire Hathaway trial

8 Comments

  1. Sales guy

    It’s hard to believe that a driver of a semi can safely stop his rig without striking another vehicle then the driver of a “van” with presumably a shorter stopping distance runs into the back of the semi and the semi has fault. Not only the jury but our court system for allowing this to be heard is out of control. I would not be surprised if the jury of his peers is actually a jury of his relatives in line for a payout.
    Raise carrier coverage to $5 mil, then cap lawsuits at that level and get those ambulance-chasing lawyers off of billboards radio, and television.

  2. James Stephens

    It’s these types of verdicts that leave me wondering what is the point in even trying to do the right thing. From the article we can glean that the carrier had modern safety equipment like forward collision avoidance radar, the driver reacted properly to the hazard and avoided colliding with the van in front of him, all of this was caught on a dash camera, and yet still ends up losing 16 mil because a 21 year old male who was driving like an aggressive d—a– rear ended the truck. The civil courts have no regard for the law or justice, it’s come down to how much sympathy a plaintiff’s attorney can drum up for their client. While a lot of these insane verdicts do take a hit once they move up in the appellate courts, just the idea that something like this can get a jury to sign off on that size of an award for something that is clearly not the defendants fault should scare the hell out of anyone involved in commercial transportation

  3. Dave

    The fact that this even went to trial is embarrassing. Georgia is a Democrat state full of selfish people looking for hand outs. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes, then blame others for your brain injury. It’s obvious what kind of people comprised the jury.

  4. Nick

    This is crazy.

    There are rear end collisions daily in which the rear vehicle law enforcement automatically cite/charge for following too close.

    How does this even make sense?

  5. Steve

    This is ridiculous. Obviously, the car following was going too fast and too close for conditions. Basically, self-inflicted injuries.
    Stay out of Dekalb County GA too many ambulance chaser attorneys. Had a dash cam video of a car weaving in and out of traffic and he struck right side of our truck. Had a witness who would testify that this driver (who struck us) passed him over the speed limit and was weaving in and out of traffic. Had video of whole episode. Still the guy sued us. Took two years of wearing him down and spending his council’s money. He never showed up in court (guess the attorney was tired of answering questions for him). I was lucky. Too many greedy lawyers. They will take 40% of that poor soul’s settlement plus expenses. Now it will be appealed because of the amount and there will be more expenses. It will probably be cut down in the end and the lawyers will be the only ones coming out on top.

  6. Donny

    From the article, “[Plaintiff] was riding behind the truck. He said he swerved to avoid the Brown truck but did collide with it…” This is a garbage system we operate under in which a truck is rear-ended and still he as at fault.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

John Kingston

John has an almost 40-year career covering commodities, most of the time at S&P Global Platts. He created the Dated Brent benchmark, now the world’s most important crude oil marker. He was Director of Oil, Director of News, the editor in chief of Platts Oilgram News and the “talking head” for Platts on numerous media outlets, including CNBC, Fox Business and Canada’s BNN. He covered metals before joining Platts and then spent a year running Platts’ metals business as well. He was awarded the International Association of Energy Economics Award for Excellence in Written Journalism in 2015. In 2010, he won two Corporate Achievement Awards from McGraw-Hill, an extremely rare accomplishment, one for steering coverage of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster and the other for the launch of a public affairs television show, Platts Energy Week.