Since our founding in 1990, Lightfoot has represented clients in virtually every sector of the transportation industry. Whether the mode is rail, automobile, trucking, aviation, or recreational vehicles, our attorneys excel at defending clients whose business is moving goods and people. We regularly defend automobile, heavy truck, bus, locomotive, and aircraft manufacturers — as well as their component suppliers — in high-stakes product liability, commercial, and catastrophic injury litigation.

Our work includes serving as national and regional coordinating counsel for U-Haul International, automotive component supplier Meritor WABCO, and heavy truck manufacturer PACCAR. We have defended more than 600 cases for both foreign and domestic automobile manufacturers — including Chrysler, Ford, Hyundai, and VW — alleging an array of defect theories involving air bag systems, seat belt systems, seat backs, door latches, vehicle structure, and crashworthiness claims.

We also represent motor carriers — a favorite target of personal injury attorneys — as well as road builders, who are often not shielded by the immunity laws that protect the state agencies with whom they contract.

In short, Lightfoot attorneys have a deep understanding of transportation related litigation.

Representative Matters

  • Reversal of a $14 million jury verdict against Hyundai Motor America and Hyundai Motor Company in a personal injury case in Pulaski County, Virginia.
  • Reversal by the Alabama Supreme Court of a trial court order which did not provide sufficient protection to commercially sensitive airbag system technology.
  • Defense verdict on behalf of BL Development Corp., Grand Casinos, Inc. and Caesar’s Entertainment, Inc. arising out of a bus crash involving 15 fatalities and 14 injured passengers that occurred in Arkansas and was filed in Mississippi.
  • Defense of a road builder in a hydroplaning case brought on behalf of an injured minor and the estates of his two parents who were killed in the crash. The trial resulted in a hung jury, and the case was settled favorably before the second trial.
  • Successful defense of an automotive company in a case where plaintiff who died from liver laceration alleged death was the result of a defective seat belt system.
  • Retention shortly before trial in the Huntsville, Alabama School Bus crash cases in which 33 school children were either killed or injured. At the time of our retention, a third motion for sanctions was pending and the case was set for trial in 30 days. We avoided sanctions, retained new experts, and presented a vigorous defense that enabled the cases to be satisfactorily resolved.
  • Summary judgment for the manufacturer of a commercial vehicle collision mitigation system in a personal injury case in Michigan. The plaintiff alleged that she sustained severe neck injuries due to improper initiation and braking by the collision avoidance system on her 18 wheeler.
  • Summary judgment – pursuant to the General Aviation and Revitalization Act – in two multiple-death cases for a general aviation aircraft manufacturer in cases related to single–engine climb performance and FAA certification issues.