Liability for Truck Tire-Blowout Accidents

Semi-truck tire blowouts on Pennsylvania highways can cause devastating accidents, leaving victims with serious injuries and overwhelming medical bills. When these dangerous incidents occur on busy roads like I-81 or I-83 around Harrisburg, determining liability becomes crucial for injured parties seeking compensation.

At Schmidt Kramer, our experienced Harrisburg truck accident attorneys can investigate your case, identify all responsible parties, and fight aggressively to secure the compensation you deserve for your injuries. Our legal team understands the complexities of trucking regulations and how to hold negligent parties accountable when tire failures cause life-altering crashes.

Call our firm at (717) 888-8888 today to get started

The Dangers of Semi-Truck Tire Blowouts In Harrisburg

Semi-truck tire blowouts pose a severe risk to everyone on the road and can cause multi-vehicle accidents due to the massive size and weight of these commercial vehicles. Truck drivers could lose control when a tire suddenly explodes at highway speeds, causing the vehicle to swerve across lanes, jackknife, or roll over—especially on heavily trafficked routes like I-81, I-83, and the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

The result of these incidents can be devastating, leaving victims vulnerable to traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord damage, severe fractures, and even wrongful death. Dangerous debris from the blown tire creates additional hazards, as other drivers may swerve suddenly to avoid tire fragments or collide with the scattered rubber shreds at highway speeds, triggering a potentially dangerous chain reaction of crashes that can shut down roads for hours.

What Causes Semi-Truck Tire Blowouts on Pennsylvania Highways?

Semi-truck tire blowouts on highways are typically caused by several preventable factors that trucking companies and drivers are responsible for monitoring. These common causes can help identify liable parties after a crash occurs:

Improper tire inflation causing excessive heat buildup and weakening tire structure
Inadequate pre-trip inspections missing visible tire damage or wear issues
Overloaded trailers exceeding tire weight ratings and safety specifications
Poor maintenance schedules neglecting regular tire rotation and replacement
Manufacturing defects in the tire design, materials, or production process
Road hazards, including potholes, construction debris, and sharp objects
Extreme weather conditions combined with worn tires create dangerous situations
Tire aging and deterioration, especially when using recapped or retreaded tires

How Do Commercial Truck Tire Blowouts Lead to Multi-Vehicle Accidents?

Semi-truck tire blowouts often trigger dangerous secondary crashes involving multiple vehicles, especially on busy highways around Harrisburg. When a commercial truck experiences sudden tire failure, the consequences can quickly escalate beyond the truck itself.

Sudden loss of vehicle control causes the truck to swerve unpredictably across multiple lanes
Flying tire debris creates hazardous road conditions for nearby motorists
Panic braking by surrounding drivers leads to rear-end collisions
Jackknifing of the truck cab and trailer blocks multiple lanes of traffic
Truck rollovers crush smaller vehicles in adjacent lanes
Oil, fuel, and cargo spills create slippery surfaces and additional obstacles
Reduced visibility from dust and debris clouds disorients other drivers
Traffic congestion from the initial incident increases the risk of secondary crashes

Which Specific Parties Can Be Held Liable for Semi-Truck Tire Failures?

Semi-truck tire blowout accidents often involve multiple responsible parties beyond just the driver on the road. Determining liability typically requires investigating the complex chain of responsibilities that affect commercial vehicle safety. From the trucking company’s maintenance protocols to the actions of third-party repair facilities, identifying all potentially liable parties is crucial for maximizing your potential compensation after a tire failure accident.

Trucking Companies

Trucking companies have a responsibility to maintain tires and adhere to safety protocols. They must carry out proper inspection schedules, maintain accurate service records, and ensure that all vehicles meet federal safety standards. Failure to establish and enforce critical safety measures can lead to higher amount of negligence in tire blowouts claims.

Truck Drivers and Operators

Professional truck drivers are required to conduct thorough pre-trip inspections that specifically check tire condition, pressure, and tread depth before every journey. When drivers neglect these mandatory inspections, continue driving on visibly damaged tires, or fail to report maintenance issues to their employers, they may share liability for resulting accidents.

Maintenance and Repair Facilities

Third-party maintenance shops that service commercial trucks must properly inspect, repair, and document all tire-related work in accordance with industry standards. Improperly installed tires or negligent repair work can create liability when those errors contribute to catastrophic tire failures.

Cargo Loading Teams

Overloaded trailers or improperly distributed cargo place excessive weight and stress on specific tires, increasing the risk of blowouts. Loading personnel who exceed weight limits or create imbalanced loads that concentrate pressure on tires can potentially be held accountable for resulting failures.

Leasing Companies

When trucks or trailers are leased rather than owned by the operating company, the leasing entity may retain maintenance responsibilities depending on contract terms. Leasing companies that fail to maintain tires according to safety standards before releasing equipment to carriers can face liability claims.

Parts Distributors

Companies that sell recapped, used, or aftermarket tires to commercial fleets must ensure these products meet all safety requirements. Distributors who knowingly sell substandard tire products or misrepresent their condition to trucking companies share responsibility when those components fail and cause accidents.

What Critical Evidence Must Be Preserved Immediately After a Tire Blowout Crash?

Acting quickly to preserve evidence after a semi-truck tire blowout accident is essential for establishing liability and building a successful injury claim. Your attorney will use specific documentation to prove negligence and establish a direct connection between the tire failure and your injuries.

Photographs of the blown tire, showing the specific failure point and damage pattern
The truck’s maintenance and inspection logs for the previous 6-12 months
Driver hours-of-service records and pre-trip inspection documentation
Black box data from the truck’s electronic control module
Tire manufacturer information, including Department of Transportation (DOT) identification numbers
Witness statements from other motorists who observed the blowout
Police accident report with responding officer’s observations
Dashcam footage from the truck or surrounding vehicles
Cargo and weight tickets showing loading conditions
Roadway evidence, such as skid marks and debris patterns

Do I Need To Hire a Specialized Truck Accident Lawyer After a Tire Blowout in Harrisburg?

Hiring a specialized truck accident lawyer after a tire blowout crash is crucial due to the complex liability issues and federal regulations governing commercial vehicles. Unlike standard car accidents, semi-truck cases involve multiple potential defendants, corporate legal teams, and specific evidence that general practice attorneys may miss. Your Schmidt Kramer truck accident lawyer with specific experience in commercial trucking understands the importance of DOT compliance records and how to analyze maintenance logs to identify key violations that prove negligence.

Schmidt Kramer’s truck accident attorneys have the specialized knowledge to protect your rights following a tire blowout crash. We act immediately to preserve crucial evidence, engage tire experts, and counter the aggressive defense tactics of trucking companies whose investigators arrive at accident scenes within hours. This swift, experienced response often makes the critical difference between a denied claim and securing the full compensation you deserve.

What Pennsylvania-Specific Damages Can You Recover in a Tire Blowout Claim?

Pennsylvania law permits truck accident victims to pursue substantial compensation for losses suffered in tire blowout crashes, beyond just immediate medical expenses. A comprehensive claim should account for both economic and non-economic damages, reflecting the true cost of these devastating accidents.

Medical expenses, including emergency care, hospitalization, surgeries, and ongoing rehabilitation
Lost wages and diminished future earning capacity
Pain and suffering
Property damage to your vehicle and personal belongings
Emotional distress, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress
Loss of life’s pleasures and enjoyment
Disfigurement and permanent scarring compensation
Punitive damages in cases of gross negligence or willful misconduct
Wrongful death benefits for families who lose loved ones
Consortium claims for spouses affected by injuries to their partner

How a Driver’s Response to a Tire Blowout Affects Liability Under PA Comparative Negligence Laws

Pennsylvania’s modified comparative negligence law makes careful examination of how both truck drivers and passenger vehicle operators respond during tire blowout emergencies crucial. When a commercial truck experiences a sudden tire failure, the driver’s reaction—whether they maintain control, attempt proper recovery techniques, or panic and overcorrect—becomes a critical factor in determining liability percentages. Similarly, surrounding motorists who react improperly to debris or swerving trucks may share some responsibility if their actions contributed to the severity of the accident.

Under Pennsylvania’s 51 percent bar rule, accident victims can recover damages even if they share some responsibility. However, their fault must not exceed 50 percent. This means that even if you made a minor driving error while responding to a truck’s tire blowout, you may still qualify for substantial compensation, though your assigned percentage of fault will reduce your award. This highlights why having experienced legal representation is crucial as your attorney can gather evidence showing the truck driver or company bears primary responsibility while minimizing any comparative negligence assigned to you.

What Sets Successful Tire Blowout Claims Apart From Failed Cases?

Successful tire blowout claims depend on the preservation of evidence quickly and expert analysis that directly connects the failure to specific negligence. Winning cases often secure physical evidence before disposal, obtain unaltered maintenance records, and have legal help that identifies clear patterns of safety violations rather than isolated incidents.

Failed claims typically result from delayed legal response, allowing trucking companies to control evidence and shape the narrative. Without specialized knowledge of commercial vehicle regulations and tire engineering, general attorneys could overlook crucial violations, such as improper tire matching or exceeding weight limits.

Injured In a Trucking Accident? Contact Our Trusted Law Firm Today

Tire blowout accidents represent some of the most devastating truck crashes on Harrisburg highways. Victims should not have to bear the financial burden when company negligence or inadequate maintenance lead to these preventable tragedies. Pursuing maximum compensation requires thorough investigation and aggressive representation against powerful insurance companies.

At Schmidt Kramer, our dedicated team brings decades of experience to every tire blowout case we handle. We understand the complex mechanical issues and liability factors involved in these specialized claims. Our proven approach to securing favorable results for clients begins with a free, no-obligation consultation to discuss your legal options.

Do not wait to protect your rights. Contact our Harrisburg office today or complete our case evaluation form to schedule your confidential consultation.

Millions recovered for our clients. Call: (717) 888-8888 today

Free Case Review

No Upfront Fees

Testimonials

Mike Kosik and his team were incredible. I cannot thank them enough for their hard work and dedication after taking on my case following an auto accident in April 2022 where a driver pulled out in front of me. I highly recommend them should you ever need a personal injury attorney. Thank you so much!
My Atty took good care of all my needs during my issues I was well represented and everything was made clear and up front. I would highly recommend using this office
I can't thank Schmidt Kramer, P.C. enough for their dedication and hard work on my case. After my injury, dealing with the insurance company was overwhelming, but their team stepped in and fought tirelessly to ensure I got the benefits I needed for treatment. They kept me informed every step of the way and worked diligently to reach a fair settlement. Their professionalism, expertise, and compassion made all the difference. If you're looking for a personal injury firm that truly cares and delivers results, I highly recommend Schmidt Kramer, P.C.!
Erhan Yayla
Great compassionate group of people who truly listen & help where needed!
Karen Steyers
Dear Scott,
Hello there! I’m a little late to the game here, but I wanted to be certain I wrote to you. Oops—sorry for the typo! As you’ve probably gathered, I am writing you from a typewriter. Do you still use these in the office? Back on topic, I wanted to take a moment to express my deep gratitude for your guidance and support throughout the entire legal process for my accident. Can you believe it’s been five years?? Your attention to detail, professionalism, and delicate handling of my case made an incredibly difficult time more manageable for me and my family. We’re forever grateful.
From the moment you stepped foot in that hospital room with me, I felt relieved to have someone in my corner like you and your team. You took the time not only to explain each legal step in a way that made sense but also to acknowledge the emotional weight of what I was going through. That delicate balance—handling the intricacies of my case with precision while also being sensitive to my well-being—is something I will always be grateful for. In many ways, the outcome of the case reflected your dedication, but what has stayed with me even more is how you treated me throughout the process—with patience, respect, and compassion. You listened to my concerns and reassured me in moments of uncertainty. And even now, I feel your compassion each year on my birthday when I receive a text from you!
Thank you, not just for the outcome, but for the way you handled each moment. You are an incredible lawyer, but more importantly, an incredible person, and I was fortunate to have you in my corner.
With heartfelt gratitude,
Ricky D

Recent Results

$10,043,952.13 Personal Injury
Schmidt Kramer, P.C.partner Gerard C. Kramer won a personal injury action for $10,043,952.13 in Northumberland County on behalf of a volunteer firefighter who was the victim of Intentional Tort. The 50-year-old volunteer firefighter was seriously injured when a barn collapsed, causing a spinal injury which left him a paraplegic. The claim was brought against the arsonist who intentionally started the fire. It is believed that the verdict is the highest ever in Northumberland County.
View Results
$4,034,000.00 Personal Injury
Yesterday a Judge in Union County (Lewisburg, PA) awarded a couple from New Berlin, Pennsylvania, over $4,000,000 because the husband was shot while turkey hunting.You might ask yourself, how does a turkey hunting accident end up with that type of verdict? In order to understand the verdict you would have to know our clients. They are good people who had their life wrecked. Plus, you would have to know the defendant, who should not have been hunting with a gun because he was prohibited after a previous criminal conviction.It is a good verdict, because the Judge was able to do two things with his decision. First, he communicated to two very good people that their losses were something that those of us on the outside could appreciate and value. Mike Hobbins (our client) is a 51 year old guy who lost his sight because a convicted felon --who should not have even possessed a gun-- went hunting illegally, and broke with impunity the most fundamental rule in hunting: identify your target before you pull the trigger. The Judge accepted the financial loss Mr. Hobbins' suffered, but listened closely to the evidence of less tangible losses. When Mike broke down on the stand, because his daughter would end up walking him down the aisle at her wedding, as opposed to how it was supposed to go, the Judge was listening. When Mike could not keep it together, because of how emasculating it was for him not to be able to provide financially for his family, the Judge was listening. It was facts like these that the Judge cited to support the $2,000,000 award for non-economic damages. Second, the Judge wanted to send a message. Union County is a hunting county. Many of the residents hunt there, and people from outside the area come to Union County to hunt. It was my impression, from the Judge's statements as he rendered his decision, that he wanted to send a message to the people in Union County to protect them in their sport. The rules in place to restrict people convicted of crimes not to have a gun are not to be broken. Hunting is serious and you have to identify your target before you shoot. When you turn your back on the rules that are set to provide safety in a sport, you risk being an example. Here, the $1,000,000 punitive damage award sends that message loud and clear.When it really comes down to brass tacks, the right action was taken against a Defendant who may never truly appreciate what kind of impact his reckless choices caused.At Schmidt Kramer, we are injury lawyers. That means we work with people who were hurt in car accidents, who were hurt by the neglect of nursing homes, or those that were seriously injured because of the reckless, thoughtless acts of others. If you or a loved one have been injured in Pennsylvania, we may be able to help. While the verdict yesterday is not one that is representative of every case we do, it does show that serious and dedicated representation can bring good results.Joe ChapmanJanuary 18, 2013
View Results
$2,200,000.00 Auto Accidents
On Monday, January 6, 2014, Schmidt Kramer accident lawyer Scott Cooper obtained a verdict on behalf of his client who is the widow of a man who died in a fiery crash on Interstate 78 in Lebanon County. The awarded verdict of $2.2 million was in a nonjury proceeding before a federal judge in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. That verdict includes $100,000 in punitive damages assessed against the owner of the trucking company.Kamilah Claxton won summary judgment in November after the defendants, Sukhwinder Singh and the trucking company for which he worked, failed to file a brief in opposition to Claxton's motion, which was made in September. The verdict in Claxton v. Singh was issued after the court held a non-jury assessment of damages earlier this month."Mr. Sukhchan Singh, the employer, is liable on the basis of respondent superior, but was also grossly negligent in failing to maintain his vehicle in compliance with state and federal law, particularly with regard to having required safety inspections and correcting defects in its braking equipment," said U.S. District Judge William W. Caldwell of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in his opinion accompanying the verdict."He was also grossly negligent in entrusting his vehicle to Sukhwinder Singh, an inexperienced truck driver who had failed the written test and driving test multiple times before finally earning his commercial driving license," Caldwell said.
View Results
$1,200,000.00 Personal Injury
A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.2012-06-26 10:00:00 AMDate of Verdict: June 19. 2012Court and Case No.: C.P. Dauphin County No. 2009-CV-14003-MMJudge: Scott EvansType of Action: Medical malpracticeInjuries: Anoxic brain injuryPlaintiffs Counsel: Terry S. Hyman, Schmidt Kramer, HarrisburgPlaintiffs Experts: Dr. Anna H. Messner, liability; Lucille Packer, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Palo Alto, Calif.; Terry P. Leslie, vocations and earning capacity, Lancaster; Dr. Hilary B. Berlin, pediatric psychiatry, Great Neck, N.Y.Defense Counsel: Andrew H. Foulkrod, Darlene K. King, Foulkrod Ellis, Camp Hill, PADefense Experts: James C. Reilly, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Wilmington, DEComment: A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.The entire verdict came against Dr. Andrew M. Shapiro, the doctor who plaintiffs Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Metz alleged chose to have the boy monitored at a pediatric ward. The plaintiffs argued Shapiro failed to tell nurses caring for the baby about, and how to care for, the boy's enhanced risk for respiratory failure.The jury came back on June 19 and awarded Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Mets $500,000 in non-economic damages and $686,170 in loss of future earning capacity, according to the plaintiffs counsel.According to the statement, the baby's mother brought him to Shapiro because she was "'afraid that he might stop breathing during his sleep,'" the plaintiffs' pretrial statement said. Shapiro performed a sleep study and observed the baby's Apnea Hypopnea Index to be 43 — four times higher than what's considered severe. A tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy were performed.According to the plaintiffs, the baby's sleep study results put him at an increased risk for post-operative respiratory complications. Despite this, they argued in the statement, Shapiro ordered the pediatric nurses at the Harrisburg Hospital general pediatric ward to observe the boy as they would any other patients — about once every four hours.The pretrial statement said that one in four children who have an AHI in the 40s and oxygen desaturation below 80 have some type of respiratory problem. The younger the child, the greater the risk of a respiratory problem, the statement said.According to the statement, Shapiro took off the child's pulse oximeter, the finger-mounted device used to measure blood oxygen, and ordered a heart and respiratory rate monitor. The child was 11 months old at the time.The plaintiffs pled that the baby was last seen at 4 a.m. There was no record of his oxygen saturation for the next hour and 45 minutes. He stopped breathing a 6:40 a.m., and his brain was without oxygen long enough to cause demonstrable injury on an MRI."Immediately prior to his surgery, [the child] was a normal child, who could say mama, eat finger foods, and was just on the verge of walking," the statement said. "After his code, [he] was like a newborn. He could not lift his head or sit up. He could not talk. He could not move."In his pretrial statement, Shapiro argued that he recognized the child's pre-operative sleep study showed he was driven to breath by decreased blood oxygen saturation, which he said was typical in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.He argued the American Academy of Otolaryngology dictates that admission to the intensive care unit is not the standard of care. In the statement, he said nurses did not observe signs of respiratory distress. No alarms sounded until the child arrested, the statement said.He said the baby likely arrested as a result of hypoglycemia and/or an acute aspiration, which he argued would not have been identified by blood oxygen saturation.— Ben Present, of the Law Weekly
View Results
$1,024,040.80 Auto Accidents
Scott Cooper settled a wrongful death case on behalf of the widow of a police office who was killed in a car accident in the line of duty for $1,024,040.80. The claim against the other driver was amicably resolved before suit was filed for the entire available policy limits for the other driver. The case took place in Adams County, PA.
View Results

Who May Be Liable for a Semi-Truck Tire Blowout if it Causes a Crash?

Table of Contents