$19 million lawsuit filed in 2007 Bay Bridge crash
The families of three men killed on the Bay Bridge in 2007 after a trailer detached from an SUV are claiming the state is partially to blame for the ensuing seven-vehicle pileup and the deaths of their loved ones.
In a $19 million wrongful-death lawsuit filed earlier this month, the families of James Hewitt Ingle and father and son Randall and Jonathan Orff argue the Maryland Transportation Authority was negligent May 10, 2007, when it allowed two-way traffic on the bridge's westbound span.
They noted previous wrecks and fatalities while two-way traffic was in effect on the bridge, and said the state should have known it needed barriers to separate lanes and a notification system to warn drivers of the "dangerous and perilous condition" awaiting them.
Officials with the transportation authority - the agency responsible for the bridge and one of eight defendants named in the suit - declined to comment on the allegations.
However, Sgt. Jonathan Green, a spokesman for authority Police, said shortly after Ingle and the Orffs were killed that two-way traffic did not contribute to the crash.
"If the trailer had not come unhitched, there would not have been an accident," he said, echoing similar comments included in a police report that downplayed the significance of two-way traffic with regard to the accident.
In addition to the transportation authority, the lawsuit names as defendants the driver of the sport utility vehicle, Stephen Adam Burt of Rockville, the owner of the trailer, Levon Andonian of Gaithersburg, two truck drivers involved in the pileup and their employers.
Burt and Andonian could not be reached for comment, and it is unclear who will represent them in the lawsuit, which was filed April 1 in county Circuit Court.
Paul D. Bekman, the attorney representing the victims' families, said his clients' loved ones did not have to die.
"This was a preventable tragedy," said Bekman, who is representing Esther Marie Orff, Randall's wife and Jonathan's mother, and Debra Sue Ingle, James Ingle's wife. Brandon Orff, Randall's surviving son, also is named as a plaintiff.
According to the lawsuit, on the day of the wreck two-way traffic was in effect on the three-lane westbound span. The right and center lanes remained westbound, while the left lane was eastbound.
Police said Burt was driving his 2000 Lincoln Navigator west across the Bay Bridge at about 4 p.m. when a homemade trailer he was hauling came loose. The trailer slid into the path of the Orffs' eastbound vehicle - ultimately resulting in the seven-vehicle pileup.
Randall Orff, 47, of Millington, and his son, Jonathan, 19, died in the wreck, as well as Ingle, 44, a former Crofton resident who worked in west county at the time.
No charges were filed against Burt, though the safety chains he used were too long and he did not use a hitch pin to secure the trailer.
Police said "no current regulations exist that can be applied to the proper securement of a trailer by the public in a noncommercial manner," and prosecutors said "it is unlikely that a reasonable person would have anticipated that the trailer would break loose."
The lawsuit alleges negligence on the part of Burt regarding the operation of his vehicle and that Andonian was negligent when he built the trailer without a safety hitch pin. It also alleges the drivers of two tractor-trailers involved in the wreck were negligent; that they were driving too fast under the circumstances and failed to control their vehicles.
Fifteen months after Ingle and the Orffs were killed on the westbound span of the bridge, there was another fatal accident on the eastbound span. Two-way traffic also was in effect that day.
Police said John R. Short, 57, of Willards, in Wicomico County on the Eastern Shore, was driving a tractor-trailer west across the bridge at about 3:50 a.m. on Aug. 10, 2008, when an eastbound car veered into his lane. He swerved left, smashed through a concrete barrier and careened into the Chesapeake Bay. Short died in his rig.
Officials continued to defend two-way traffic after that wreck.
Ronald Freeland, executive secretary of the MTA, said at a news conference, "Two-way traffic is not the optimum way to do business," and that the MTA tries to minimize its use.
But authority Police Chief Marcus Brown argued two-way traffic can be safe.
"We actively manage the risk that is involved," he said.
The defendants
The families of three men killed in a 2007 multi-car crash on the Bay Bridge filed a wrongful-death civil lawsuit this month, naming the following eight entities as defendants:
- Maryland Transportation Authority, the agency that oversees the Bay Bridge.
- Stephen Adam Burt, driver of the SUV hauling a trailer that detached and caused the seven-car pileup.
- Levon Andonian, owner of the trailer that caused the accident.
- Joshua Hargrove, driver of a tractor-trailer involved in the crash.
- Mobile Mini Inc., a Tempe, Ariz., company that employed Hargrove.
- Edwin Dixon, driver of a second tractor-trailer involved in the crash.
- AG Trucking Inc., a Goshen, Ind., company that employed Dixon.
- Travelers Property Casualty Co. Of America, the company that issued the car-insurance policy for one of the men killed in the crash.
What Inspections? - April 28, 2009 Someone stated that a homemade trailer is inspected? Maryland is a No Inspection State... What standards do they look for? Can Someone show me the guidlines for an inspection of a trailer? All they look for is lights... and wheels... and they give you a vin number. That is all,, they don't check the wheels, Rims, construciton and length of safety chains. How long are the chains? What strength? What type, how do you maintain? Your State had almost 2 years to fix this problem but yet another person can be killed and what is the driver charged with? We can form a Utility Trailer Hit man company and go into Maryland and take out somebody and what are we charged with? Also.... Can someone get a step by step inspection requirements of a trailer? If you have one.... it is only a one time inspection... so you can have it for 10 years and have 24 - 7 exposure to the elements... and have dry rotted tires and you don't have to get it inspected again. www.dangeroustrailers.org unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking Ron Melancon - Glen Allen, VA
Report Abuse 0 
Trailer Inspection - April 27, 2009
To clear up some misinformation, All home-made trailers must have a MARYLAND SAFTEY INSPECTION CERTIFICATE to be registered in Maryland. I just checked with the MD-DMV and verified this information. Either the trailer was improperly tagged or the inspector did a negligent job inspecting the trailer. Somebody has some explaining to do! I can not figure out why the driver pulling the trailer and the trailers registration is not getting more attention. I know if it was me I would have been charged with everything under the sun, including unsafe operation of a vehicle, reckless driving etc... I pull several trailers and my insurance policy covers everything attached to my vehicle, just as everyone elses should. I do not and would not pull a homemade trailer. Too bad newspapers don't do investigative journalism anymore, someone somewhere is covering up something in this mess!! Giving all that I feel bad for the people that lost family members and wish them the best, if thats possible.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
S R. - ,
Report Abuse 0
2 way traffic - April 27, 2009
Two way traffic is not the real issue here. There are tens of thousands of miles of roads in this country that are two way. Anyone that cannot stay in a designated lane perhaps should not be driving. I think anyone would be hard pressed to find that the road pattern caused any accident anywhere. I fail to see how anything but human error was to cause in this accident and no matter what we do that will be a factor that will never be taken out of driving. More cops on the bridge would not have made the trailer stay attached.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
David Kyle - Pasadena, MD
Report Abuse 0
Reckless Drivers - April 27, 2009
Anyone who has driven on the Bay Bridge knows that drivers drive recklessly for the conditions. Perhaps some of you reading this are guilty of that. I don't drive there regularly, but I remember being shocked at being tailgated on the bridge, with people darting in and out of lanes, even while I myself was driving 5-10 mph over the speed limit.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Sue M. - ,
Report Abuse 0 
A complete failure of our Governmen - April 26, 2009
When you get a moment please go to [link]. Our government has know about our efforts since 2004. A full 3 years before this tragic accident. In fact we had a trailer accident right here in Virginia back in 2006 involving can you guess??? A homemade traier... please go here to see the report.. [link]The Utility Trailer Industry does not want to make a better product because it will cost them profit. NO INSPECTIONS, NO TRAINING, NO STANDARS ARE IN PLACE for any trailer under 3,000 pounds. The Federal Government has failed to mandate a Federal Standard for a trailer Hitch... guess who won... the Utility Trailer Industry. We got your Governor to form a Task Force.. Go here to view... [link] Guess who stoped this... Yes The Utilty Trailer Industry. In fact the Utility Trailer Industry including Carry On Trailers has paid into the Campain of Congressman Whittman!!!! Yes Once again they have friends in very good places. Since 1976 over 14,810 people killed.. Since 1988 Over 449,000 people injured and Since 1988 over 1,500,000 things damanged and destroyed by "Passenger Cars That Tow Trailers. In fact my family is almost in Bankrupsey because like a fool.... I thought I was doing good... but yet the Utility Trailer Industry has tried to destroy my efforts... They have more money. So....In fact we have a defective trailer hitch and our government chooses not to issue a recall please go here to view report [link] Our Government has enacted federal regulations for bumpers, child seats, seat belts, lead paint, children's toys, food and many other items. Yet for some reason the Utility Trailer Industry has been successful in lobbing our government to look the other way with all trailers under 3,000 pounds. So... Dangerous Trailers.org States: "It make more sense for city and state agencies responsible for the Safety of highways to make A UNIFIED Safety Standard for Utility Trailers under 3,000 pounds to make them safer instead of having to deal with Lawyers, Courts, Injuryies, Lost Productivity after a tragic crash like this. When will we act??? when the next person is killed?? The Utilty Trailer Industry.. Profit over Safety.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Ron Melancon - Glen Allen, VA
Report Abuse 0
Fault? - April 26, 2009
The driver of the SUV, the person or company that designed the trailer, the company that sold the metal to build the trailer, the welder, the welding rod manufacturer? Heck, sue EVERYBODY! And one wonders why insurance is so expensive. As Forrest Gump said; 'Sh@t Happens'.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Emma G. - West River, MD
Report Abuse +7
bridge - April 26, 2009
this is an obvious shot at the MTA and I'm glad someone stepped up to take some action. clearly the gov hasn't felt enough pressure to do a darn thing to make the traffic patterns safer. such as: more officers on duty around the clock, and not just decoy cars!? more traffic enforcement!!?? an independent study of the safety of the bridge???!!
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
j. phelps - stevensville, MD
Report Abuse +4
who wins - April 26, 2009
although I agree w/ most said however, with hindsight there are no accidents and or mistakes. If the driver of the suv honestly thought the trailer was hitched sufficiently, then it was clearly an accident. If the driver of the suv had 2nd thoughts about pulling out of his driveway then yes he should be penalized, but I doubt he did. I am sure he is suffering as much as the family. And I am sure the family is feeling the same way, in a small way. I agree with the spouse and family suing for damages, not for their own profit,(on which I am positive they are not) but to make a point that something has to be done about the 2 way traffic pattern that has caused many mishaps..perhaps not as deadly as theirs. I did see a possible solution as to temporary barriers when the 2 way traffic pattern is in effect. Perhaps we need to look into our $$$ spending and do it wisely before another family is,... well not a family any more. Instead of criticizing each other w/ all of these comments posted, maybe we need to come together as citizens of Anne Arundel County, Queen Annes County or Just Maryland as a Whole, whom have loved ones across the bridge(either way), or if not, but come together and make sure this tradegy does not happen again.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
m moorelend - annapolis, md
Report Abuse -40
on 2nd though Mr. Luce. - April 26, 2009
The fact that there are no regulations for the proper securing of a non-commercial trailer is a known , measurable variable. It is not necessarily a contributing factor to the accident however, as according to the cops the reasonable man standard should apply.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Tina Schubbie - annapolis, MD
Report Abuse +8
Who wins - April 26, 2009
It is unfortunate that a family has to live through something as tragic as the death of a loved one. While any accident can be prevented, that does not mean they always will. A mistake on the part of one person has caused the family this loss. To blame others and the State is unreasonable. No one can put a real price on the life a loved one. While I doubt the family saw dollar signs as soon as this accident happened, I know lawyers did. I have to wonder how many rushed to find contact information so they could pitch their case. With a lawyer blaming anyone they could possibly think of they help insure that they will get a big payout. By naming the State the lawyers in this case hope to be able to tap what they believe is the bottomless pit of the taxpayers wallet. In the sue happy country we live in, it is the lawyers that ultimately make out. While I think compensation must be paid for the lost lives, I think they, must be reasonable. If the State pays, taxpayers end up with the bill. If the companies and insurance pay, we all lose as they just pass on the cost to the consumers, who are also the taxpayers. People might think the families win, and maybe they do but they still have lost loved ones. No amount of money would replace the loss of one of my family, it would not even make it bearable, but is there a point when trying to replace a loss becomes greed or revenge? So then we go back to the one group that wins no matter what, the lawyers. Is it any wonder lawyers are the ones who fight tort reform so vigorously?
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
David Kyle - Pasadena, MD
Report Abuse -26
P. Luce - April 26, 2009
though your points seem possible, much of it is mere speculation. you present to us a perfect storm scenario yet none of the variables are certain except for the fact that the trailer was unsafe and detached from the Navigator. This was hardly a convergence of dangerous variables my friends, as the only variable that is certain is the complete and utter disregard for the safety of others by the driver of the SUV. My friends, let me make it clear, safety is no accident.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Tina Schubbie - annapolis, MD
Report Abuse +3
Lawsuit - April 26, 2009
This accident is like most of this magnitude: several separate instances of negligence, some more egregious than others, converge to create catastrophe. The trailer maker appears to have omitted one of two available safety devices; the state did not regulate trailers; the driver pulling the trailer may not have secured the hitch properly; poor planning on the part of the state reduced the safety on the bridge significantly vis--vis two-way traffic; finally, all the drivers were probably speedingten over is speedingdont we all want to just wink and say well thats expected. According to the federal government, crashes were speed was factor cost the Maryland economy about $300 million each year. This lawsuit is not without risks for those filling it: they could lose and lose big. It is a free country, right! If they have weighed the risks and want to go forwardgood. I happen to agree that they are doing the right thing. Judges and juries are not as stupid as the insurance companies and their lobbyists want us to think. They will hash through all the negligence here; and, at the end of the day maybe all the parties clean up their act: stop over-the-limit driving; stop state mismanagement; and, poor regulation. In fact, I would say that it is their civic duty to do everything they can to prevent this from happening again. We would be far less safe in a society void of lawsuits.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
P. Luce - Annapolis, MD
Report Abuse -35
Navigator Hillbilly - April 26, 2009
Hopefully they'll keep this hillbilly and their home-made trailer off of the road for good.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Walter N. - Delmar, MD
Report Abuse +35
Lawsuit - April 26, 2009
Although negligence was involved, I don't feel the comments by Ms. Schubbie could ever be taken seriously. If her dog were to slip out of her home and run into traffic and cause a deadly accident, I'm sure she wouldn't want to be put to death ! Yes, negligence is the key word here and the fault in my mind lies entirely with the driver of the SUV. The commercial truck drivers who were also involved, were not proven to have been driving in a wreckless manner, therefore I believe that the plantiffs in this case are simply looking for the largest payday they can get by going after the largest entities involved. You can't get blood from a turnip, but you can squeeze cash from large companies who have even larger insurance companies ! I feel bad for the families who lost loved ones, but blaming all the others who were unfortunate victims of Mr. Burt's negligence won't bring them back either !
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking
Dan C. - North Beach, MD
No comments:
Post a Comment