Legal Lane
LEGAL LANE
By Jim Klepper
$23.8 Million Dollar
Judgment
A
thing, such as no med-card in their possession.
Both drivers challenged the violation because
they had current med-cards in their wallet in
the cab, but not “on their person” when asked
are seeing this huge award as a warning
violation because the driver was able to prove
is based upon who controls the shipment
mate control of the shipment.
to remove the violation because the driver did
not have it “on his person”, but would have
had to get his wallet from the cab to show the
Shippers are becoming more selective with
whom they trust their freight, due to their additional liability if they ship strictly by the
cheapest carrier. Shippers must now incorporate the safety history of the carrier into their
decision on whom to hire to haul their freight.
Shippers are starting to make those decisions
based upon a carriers CSA safety score provided by the federal government.
It is operationally critical for carriers to
monitor and control their CSA Basic scores.
The carrier must evaluate EVERY inspection
to see if the chance exists to reduce or eliminate the points issued by the enforcement of-
jurisdiction and often even same troop for the
can be improved just by ensuring correct
coding and points for various citations, especially generic speeding, logbooks, med certs,
allow an appeal to the top state enforcement
-
recent $23.8 million dollar judgment against C.H.Robinson
Worldwide in the Illinois case of
DataQ challenges require calls and appeals betion.
The frustrating thing about DataQ challenges is the inconsistency in the results of a challenge. A simple example is two drivers in the
same jurisdiction stopped by two different en-
90 January 2012
and different effects on the driver and the carrier.
This is why I recommend that every driver
and every carrier challenge EVERY violation
they receive. CSA and the DataQ challenges
are changing and evolving every day as the
states implement their programs. The statute
of limitations also varies by state with some
such as Pennsylvania only allowing 12 months
from the date of the violation to do a DataQ
challenge. The appeal process can be different
for each state; some allow an appeal to the en-
The problem with all the current challenges
and appeals is they fail to offer Due Process to
the carrier or driver. Sure you get to make an
appeal, but to the same organization that wrote
The Due Process would allow for a challenge
or appeal to a disinterested third party such as
an Administrative Law Judge, a county or district judge.
BestDriverJOBS
www.bestdriverjobs.com