Tag: Illinois truck accident law

If the trucking company that hit you has filed for bankruptcy, or simply closed its doors, your path to compensation gets more complicated. It doesn’t disappear.

We’ve handled cases where the carrier was gone before the lawsuit ever got filed. What happens next comes down to two legal frameworks working at the same time: bankruptcy law, and the federal insurance rules that apply specifically to commercial trucking companies.

This article provides general legal information. For advice specific to your situation, talk to a licensed Illinois attorney.

The Automatic Stay: What It Means for Your Civil Case

When a company files for bankruptcy protection, something called an automatic stay kicks in under federal bankruptcy law (11 U.S.C. § 362). Think of it as a legal pause button. It freezes most civil litigation against the company that filed, personal injury lawsuits from truck accidents included.

If your case was already in court, it stops moving. If you hadn’t filed yet, you generally can’t file against the bankrupt carrier at all, not without the bankruptcy court’s permission first.

The pause isn’t forever. You, or your attorney, can file what’s called a motion for relief from the automatic stay, asking the bankruptcy court for permission to let the civil case move forward. Usually the goal isn’t to go after whatever assets the company has left. It’s to reach the insurance policy sitting behind it.

Courts tend to grant that motion when the money is coming from an insurer rather than from the bankruptcy estate itself. But the timing matters. Miss a deadline in a bankruptcy case, and a claim that was otherwise solid can get barred for good.

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable: nobody hands you a calendar with these deadlines circled in red. You have to know they exist before they pass.

Chapter 7 Versus Chapter 11: Why the Type of Bankruptcy Matters

Not all bankruptcy filings work the same way for a pending or potential injury claim. A Chapter 7 filing means the carrier is liquidating, selling off its assets to pay creditors, and going out of business entirely. A Chapter 11 filing means the carrier is trying to reorganize and keep operating.

In a Chapter 7 case, a trustee is appointed to gather and sell whatever assets exist, and creditors, including injury claimants, get in line behind secured lenders who usually have first claim on major assets like trucks and terminals. That line often runs dry before it reaches unsecured personal injury claims, which is exactly why the insurance policy matters so much more than the company’s remaining assets.

In a Chapter 11 case, the carrier continues operating while restructuring its debts, and a personal injury claim typically gets treated as an unsecured claim against the reorganized company, sometimes resolved through a claims process built into the reorganization plan itself. Either way, the insurance policy and its MCS-90 endorsement usually represent a faster, more reliable path than fighting through the bankruptcy claims process for a share of company assets.

The MCS-90 Endorsement: The Victim-Protection Mechanism

Federal law requires every for-hire motor carrier operating across state lines to carry a minimum amount of liability insurance. The rule lives in 49 CFR Part 387, and it requires carriers to file proof of that coverage with the FMCSA, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

The tool most carriers use to satisfy that requirement is something called the MCS-90 endorsement, attached to their liability policy.

The MCS-90 was built to protect the public, not the trucking company. That’s the whole point of it.

The endorsement obligates the insurer to pay a final judgment against the carrier regardless of policy defenses that would normally let the insurer walk away. Late notice of the accident. A policy exclusion. Even the carrier’s own bankruptcy. None of that gets the insurer off the hook on its own.

We’ve seen carriers disappear entirely while the insurance obligation stayed standing. Courts in multiple federal circuits have held that the MCS-90 creates a direct obligation running from the insurer to the injured person, one that survives the carrier’s bankruptcy.

How much coverage is required depends on what the truck was hauling. For most general freight, the floor is $750,000. Hazardous materials carry higher minimums.

Knowing these numbers, and whether the carrier bought coverage above the minimum, is one of the first things worth sorting out. It shapes what recovery actually looks like. You can read more about how truck accident insurance coverage works under federal rules.

It’s worth being clear about one limit on the MCS-90: it’s a floor, not a full picture of everything that might be available. Many carriers also carry excess or umbrella coverage above the federal minimum, and those additional policies are typically written on ordinary commercial terms rather than the MCS-90’s public-protection language. A carrier’s bankruptcy doesn’t automatically extend the same protection to those excess layers the way it does to the base MCS-90 policy, so each layer of coverage sometimes needs a separate analysis.

Pursuing the Insurer Directly

Because the MCS-90 creates an obligation that runs directly to the injured public, many courts let you pursue the insurer even while the carrier sits in bankruptcy or has shut down entirely.

That matters because the bankruptcy estate is often close to empty. The insurer usually isn’t. Going after the insurer, rather than fighting over what’s left of the company, is where the real money tends to be.

In practice, that means identifying the insurer from FMCSA records, confirming the MCS-90 endorsement was actually in effect on the day of the crash, and then either working through the bankruptcy court or, where the circuit allows it, filing against the insurer directly.

We pull these insurance filings through the SAFER system as a matter of course. It isn’t a hidden database. Knowing what to look for, and how to structure the claim once you find it, is where experience actually matters.

Filing a Proof of Claim in the Bankruptcy Case

Separately from pursuing the insurer, an injured party generally needs to file what’s called a proof of claim in the bankruptcy case itself, a formal document telling the bankruptcy court that you have a claim against the debtor and roughly what it’s worth. Bankruptcy courts set a deadline for filing these, called the bar date, and missing it can mean losing the right to share in whatever limited assets the estate does have.

Even when the insurance policy is expected to cover the bulk of a recovery, filing a proof of claim protects a fallback position in case coverage disputes arise or the policy limits don’t cover the full extent of the injury. It’s a procedural step that’s easy to overlook while focused on the insurance side of the case, but skipping it can close off options later if the insurance angle runs into unexpected complications.

What If the Carrier Simply Closed Without Filing Bankruptcy?

Not every carrier that vanishes actually files for bankruptcy. Some just stop operating, hand back their FMCSA operating authority, and close up shop.

No bankruptcy filing means no automatic stay. It also often means no corporate assets worth chasing. The insurance policy and the MCS-90 endorsement remain the main avenue.

If the policy was in force on the day of the crash, the coverage obligation doesn’t evaporate just because the company shut its doors afterward. The FMCSA’s SAFER system keeps records of authority revocations, and it can confirm when a carrier was actually operating and what insurance was on file at the time.

The carrier isn’t always the only name worth pursuing. A freight broker who arranged the load may face its own liability for negligently selecting an unsafe carrier, a theory Illinois recognized in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II LLC and which our guide to freight broker liability covers in more depth, and that broker’s own insurance is typically untouched by the carrier’s bankruptcy or closure. A shipper who hired the carrier knowing about its safety violations is another possible defendant. A manufacturer whose defective trailer coupling or brake system contributed to the crash is a third.

A thorough liability review often turns up a solvent defendant even when the trucking company itself is gone.

How Comparative Fault and Multiple Defendants Interact With a Bankrupt Carrier

When a case involves both a bankrupt carrier and a solvent co-defendant, like a freight broker or a maintenance contractor, Illinois’s joint and several liability rule under 735 ILCS 5/2-1117 becomes especially important. A defendant found at least 25% at fault for the crash can be held responsible for the full judgment, which matters a great deal when one defendant is bankrupt and the other one has assets and insurance to actually collect from.

Illinois’s modified comparative negligence rule under 735 ILCS 5/2-1116 still applies the same way it would in any other case, reducing your recovery by your own percentage of fault if you’re found partly responsible, as long as that percentage stays at or below 50%, a rule covered in full in our guide to Illinois comparative fault. A bankrupt defendant doesn’t get treated any differently for purposes of the fault allocation itself, but it does change which defendant actually pays the bill once fault is assigned.

How to Find Out If a Carrier Has Filed Bankruptcy

A trucking company doesn’t always announce a bankruptcy filing to the people it injured. Attorneys typically check the federal court’s PACER system, which indexes bankruptcy filings nationwide, along with the carrier’s FMCSA operating status through SAFER. A carrier that shows as “not authorized” or “out of service” in SAFER is worth investigating further, since that status often, though not always, correlates with financial trouble or a closure that predates or accompanies a bankruptcy filing.

Insurance adjusters and defense counsel sometimes go quiet after a bankruptcy filing simply because internal processes shift to bankruptcy counsel, which can look to an unrepresented claimant like the case has stalled or been abandoned. It hasn’t. It just means the next move needs to go through the bankruptcy court rather than through ordinary settlement correspondence.

A Hypothetical: How This Plays Out in Practice

The following is an illustrative example only, not a description of any actual case or client result. Picture a regional carrier that files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy eight months after one of its trucks caused a serious crash on I-55. The lawsuit against the carrier itself is automatically stayed the moment the filing hits the docket.

The injured driver’s attorney files a proof of claim in the bankruptcy case to preserve the position, then separately files a motion for relief from the automatic stay, explaining to the bankruptcy judge that the claim is aimed at the carrier’s $1 million liability policy, not the company’s remaining assets. The motion is granted within a few weeks, since courts generally see little downside in letting an insurance-funded claim proceed. The case then moves forward against the insurer directly, under the MCS-90 endorsement, while the underlying bankruptcy case continues on its own separate track with the trustee liquidating what’s left of the company.

Statute of Limitations Considerations

Illinois’s ordinary two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims under 735 ILCS 5/13-202 doesn’t stop running just because a defendant filed for bankruptcy. What changes is your ability to actually file suit against that specific defendant while the automatic stay is in place. Bankruptcy law includes its own tolling provisions that can extend certain deadlines during an active stay, but relying on those provisions without careful legal guidance is risky. The safer course is almost always to preserve your rights through a proof of claim and a timely motion for relief from the stay, rather than assuming the limitations clock has simply stopped.

Honest Assessment of the Complications

A claim against a bankrupt or dissolved carrier takes longer than an ordinary truck accident case. Bankruptcy court adds steps and timelines that don’t exist in regular civil litigation. Sit with that for a second, because it changes how you plan the next several months.

The MCS-90 is a strong protection. It is not a guarantee of full recovery. The endorsement is capped at the policy limits, and if your damages run higher than those limits, collecting the difference from a bankrupt estate is genuinely hard.

We’d rather tell you that up front than let you find out three months into the case.

Common Questions About Trucking Company Bankruptcy Claims

Does the automatic stay apply to the insurance company too?
Generally no. The automatic stay protects the debtor, the trucking company that filed for bankruptcy, but most courts don’t extend that protection to a separate insurer being sued directly under the MCS-90 endorsement, since the insurer isn’t the party that filed for bankruptcy protection.

What if I already had a lawsuit filed when the carrier filed bankruptcy?
The existing lawsuit against the carrier itself gets stayed automatically the moment the bankruptcy filing is entered. Your attorney would typically file a motion for relief from the stay to continue the case, often with the insurer substituted in or added as a party.

Can I still recover if the carrier’s insurance policy has lapsed?
This is one of the harder scenarios. If the policy was already lapsed or cancelled before the crash, the MCS-90 protections may not apply, and options narrow considerably. This is exactly why confirming the policy’s status on the date of the crash, not just at some later point, is a critical early step.

How long does a bankruptcy-complicated truck accident case usually take?
Longer than a standard case, often by many months, because of the additional bankruptcy court procedures involved. The exact timeline depends heavily on how cooperative the bankruptcy trustee and the insurer are, and how quickly the motion for relief from the stay gets resolved.

Should I still hire a personal injury attorney, or do I need a bankruptcy attorney instead?
Most personal injury attorneys who regularly handle trucking cases understand how to navigate the bankruptcy-adjacent procedures like proof of claim filings and stay-relief motions, often working alongside bankruptcy counsel when the case requires it. You generally don’t need to separately manage a bankruptcy attorney and a personal injury attorney on your own.

Does a carrier’s bankruptcy affect how much I can recover for a catastrophic injury?
It can, if your damages exceed the available insurance coverage and the bankruptcy estate has few remaining assets. This is one reason a full damages evaluation, including future medical costs and lost earning capacity for a serious injury, should happen early, so your attorney knows whether the available coverage is likely to be enough or whether pursuing additional defendants becomes more important.

What happens if multiple people were injured by the same bankrupt carrier’s truck?
When a single crash injures multiple people, or when a carrier’s bankruptcy stems from multiple claims against it, the available insurance coverage sometimes has to be divided among several claimants. Depending on how the bankruptcy and insurance claims are structured, this can mean coordinating with other injured parties’ attorneys, which is another reason experienced counsel matters in these more complicated cases.

Talk to a Chicago Attorney: Free Consultation

If the carrier in your crash has filed for bankruptcy or gone out of business, some of the deadlines you’re working against may be shorter than they’d be in a standard case. That’s not something to sit on.

Phillips Law Offices handles truck accident cases involving FMCSA-regulated carriers across Chicago and throughout Illinois. Call (312) 346-4262 or visit our contact page to schedule a free consultation.

Attorney Advertising. This page provides general information about Illinois law and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines and outcomes depend on the specific facts of your case — speak to a licensed Illinois attorney about your situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome; every case is decided on its own facts.

After a crash with a commercial truck, the insurance adjuster’s first call to you often starts the same way: you were partly to blame. Following too close. Changing lanes without signaling. Slow to yield.

Here’s what that adjuster won’t tell you. Being partially at fault in a truck accident does not automatically end your case in Illinois.

Our state runs on what’s called modified comparative fault. In plain terms: you can share some of the blame for a crash and still recover real money, as long as your share of the blame stays under one specific line. That single distinction, between a bar that wipes out your claim and a reduction that still leaves you with a real recovery, is often the most consequential legal question in the entire case.

This article provides general legal information; consult a licensed Illinois attorney for advice specific to your situation.

Illinois Modified Comparative Fault: The 51 Percent Rule Explained

That line comes from a statute, 735 ILCS 5/2-1116, and it works on two rules. Learn these, because they decide whether your claim is worth pursuing at all.

• The 51 percent bar: Go over 50 percent at fault, meaning 51 percent or more, and you recover nothing. Not a reduced amount. Nothing.
• Proportional reduction at 50 percent or under: Stay at 50 percent fault or below, and your damages are reduced by your own percentage of fault. You keep the rest.

Compare that to a “contributory negligence” state, where any fault at all on your part can wipe out your case completely. Illinois works differently. Juries assign a fault percentage to everyone involved, and the award follows that math.

How Fault Percentages Affect Your Recovery: Hypothetical Illustrations

Numbers make this rule easier to see than definitions do. The illustrations below are hypothetical; every real case turns on its own facts. But the arithmetic behind 735 ILCS 5/2-1116 never changes.

• 20% fault: A jury awards $500,000 in damages and finds you 20 percent at fault. You collect $400,000.
• 35% fault: Damages of $300,000, and you’re found 35 percent at fault. Your recovery drops to $195,000.
• 50% fault: Damages of $200,000, and you’re found exactly 50 percent at fault. You still recover $100,000. Fifty percent is the last stop before the cliff.
• 51% fault: Same $200,000 in damages, but now you’re found 51 percent at fault. You recover zero. That’s the bar in action.

One percentage point separates the third scenario from the fourth. In the third, you walk away with $100,000. In the fourth, you walk away with nothing.

Sit with that for a second. That’s exactly why insurance defense teams fight so hard over fault percentages in truck litigation. One point can be the whole case.

Joint Liability Among Multiple Defendants

Most truck cases don’t have just one defendant. There’s the driver, the trucking company, maybe a maintenance contractor or a cargo loader who packed the trailer wrong.

Under 735 ILCS 5/2-1117, Illinois limits joint and several liability for most defendants, with one carve-out: your medical expenses stay recoverable in full from any defendant regardless of their fault percentage. For your other damages, a defendant found less than 25 percent at fault is generally on the hook only for their own share, not the whole judgment. A defendant found 25 percent or more at fault stays jointly and severally liable for the full award.

Here’s where it gets uncomfortable. If one of those defendants turns out to be broke or uninsured, your ability to collect the full judgment can hinge entirely on which other defendants carry joint liability. That’s also where your own uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage can matter, since a badly capitalized trucking outfit or an owner-operator with minimal insurance sometimes cannot satisfy even a modest judgment on its own. We’ve seen cases won at trial and then partly lost at the collection stage, simply because the liability structure wasn’t built with that risk in mind. An attorney familiar with Illinois truck accident laws builds the claim around all the parties who can actually pay.

How Trucking Companies Use Blame-Shifting Tactics

Trucking carriers and their insurers litigate for a living. They know that pushing your fault percentage past 50 wipes out their liability, and that every point below 50 shaves money off what they owe. We see the same playbook again and again:

• Alleging speeding or aggressive driving: Pointing to your pre-crash speed, even if it fell within normal traffic flow, to inflate your share of fault.
• Claiming distracted driving: Digging through cell phone records or dashcam footage of the cab interior to suggest you weren’t paying attention.
• Asserting failure to yield or an improper lane change: Arguing you created the danger by drifting into the truck’s blind spot or cutting it off, a pattern we cover in more depth in our blind spot fault guide.
• Emphasizing pre-existing injuries: Suggesting part of your medical bills and pain trace back to conditions you had before the crash, shrinking what the defendant owes.

None of this is necessarily an accurate picture of what happened. It’s litigation strategy, built to move a percentage point in the carrier’s favor. We counter it with independent accident reconstruction, the truck’s own electronic data preserved before it disappears, and a hard look at the driver’s hours-of-service logs and qualification file.

Common Mistakes That Inflate Your Fault Percentage

Certain early missteps hand the trucking company’s insurer exactly the ammunition it needs. Apologizing at the scene, even a reflexive “I’m sorry,” can be recorded by witnesses or a responding officer and later characterized as an admission. Giving a recorded statement before you’ve spoken with an attorney lets a trained adjuster ask leading questions designed to get you to accept partial blame on tape. Posting about the crash on social media, even something as ordinary as a photo from days later showing you out and active, can be used to suggest your injuries or your account of events aren’t as serious as claimed. Accepting a quick settlement offer before your own investigation is complete locks in a fault percentage before your side has even built its case. And moving your vehicle before photographing its exact position, when it’s safe to wait, can erase physical evidence about the angle and force of impact that would otherwise support your account.

Fault Percentage Doesn’t Just Decide Trial Verdicts

Most truck accident claims never reach a jury. They settle. But the same 51 percent framework still drives every settlement negotiation, because both sides are essentially predicting what a jury would likely decide and negotiating around that prediction. An insurer’s opening offer is almost always built around an inflated fault percentage for you, precisely because a lower settlement number is cheaper than a trial where a jury might land closer to the true facts. Knowing the real evidence, and being prepared to take a case to trial if the offer doesn’t reflect it, is often what moves a negotiation from a lowball number toward a fair one.

How an Independent Investigation Actually Moves the Percentage

A fault percentage isn’t handed down from nowhere. It gets built, piece by piece, from evidence, and whichever side gathers better evidence tends to shape the number that finally sticks. On our end, that usually starts with an accident reconstructionist who can translate physical evidence, skid marks, crush patterns, final resting positions, into a scientific account of speed, timing, and point of impact that doesn’t depend on anyone’s memory of a chaotic few seconds.

From there, we cross-check that reconstruction against the truck’s own electronic control module data, which records pre-crash speed, braking, and throttle position independently of what the driver later says happened. Hours-of-service logs and the driver’s qualification file can reveal a fatigue or training problem that shifts fault away from you entirely. Even something as simple as pulling traffic-signal timing data or weather records for the exact time of the crash can undercut a defense theory that depended on conditions being different than they actually were. None of this happens automatically. It happens because someone requested it, quickly, before records aged out of a retention window.

A Realistic Example

Consider a hypothetical, not an actual client result. A driver merges onto the Stevenson Expressway slightly under the posted minimum speed while a semi in the next lane is following closer than the assured-clear-distance standard normally allows. The two vehicles collide. The trucking company’s insurer initially claims the merging driver caused the crash by entering traffic too slowly, aiming for a fault split near 60/40 against the injured driver. Once dashcam footage and following-distance calculations from the truck’s own ECM data are produced, showing the truck was following well under a safe distance for its speed, an accident reconstruction expert recalculates the likely fault split closer to 25 percent against the merging driver, comfortably under the 51 percent bar and enough to preserve a substantial recovery.

How Fault Is Determined at Trial

In Illinois, a jury decides fault. Illinois’s pattern jury instructions on comparative fault tell jurors how to assign a fault percentage to each party and how to reduce the plaintiff’s award to match. Jurors weigh witness testimony, physical evidence, and expert reconstruction, then land on percentages meant to reflect what each party actually contributed to the crash. In Cook County, where most of these cases in the Chicago area are filed, jury selection and case scheduling in the Law Division can add months to a trial timeline compared to a collar-county courthouse, which is one more reason both sides usually have real incentive to settle once the fault picture is clear.

That’s why the evidence you put in front of a jury matters so much. An accident reconstruction expert who can walk jurors through exactly how the crash happened, and why the truck driver’s actions caused most of it, can be the difference between a percentage you can live with and one that crosses the 51 percent line. We’ve built entire cases on depositions of the driver, the carrier’s safety director, and the eyewitnesses who saw it unfold. For a broader look at why these cases differ from an ordinary car-accident claim in the first place, see our guide on why truck accident cases need a different kind of lawyer.

Comparative Fault for Passengers, Pedestrians, and Cyclists

The 51 percent rule applies differently depending on who’s making the claim. A passenger in either vehicle generally isn’t assigned any fault at all for how the crash happened, since a passenger doesn’t control the vehicle, so their recovery typically isn’t reduced the way a driver’s would be. A pedestrian or cyclist struck by a truck can still be found comparatively at fault, for crossing outside a marked crosswalk or riding against traffic, for example, but the same 50 percent threshold still applies before their claim is barred entirely. Because pedestrians and cyclists tend to suffer more severe injuries relative to any fault they might share, insurers often push especially hard to inflate that percentage in these specific cases, which makes independent investigation just as important here as in a vehicle-on-vehicle collision.

When Weather Complicates the Fault Analysis

Illinois winters give trucking insurers an easy-sounding argument: the roads were icy, so nobody was really at fault, or worse, the injured driver should have known better than to be out at all. That argument runs into a specific problem. Illinois’s basic speed law, 625 ILCS 5/11-601, does not excuse a driver, commercial or otherwise, from adjusting speed downward for weather and road conditions. A truck traveling at the posted limit during a snowstorm can still be found negligent if that speed was unsafe for the actual conditions on the ground, precisely because the standard is reasonableness for conditions, not compliance with a static number on a sign.

This cuts both ways in a fault analysis. If you were driving cautiously and a truck following too closely for the conditions slid into you, that following-distance failure under weather conditions is often stronger evidence of the truck driver’s fault than a dry-pavement rear-end crash would be, since a professional driver is expected to know how much longer stopping distances get on ice and to adjust accordingly. Weather doesn’t reset the comparative fault analysis to some kind of no-fault default. It’s simply one more factor a reconstruction expert and, eventually, a jury weighs into who should have driven differently.

Why Acting Quickly Protects Your Claim

Illinois generally gives you two years from the date of the crash to file a personal injury claim, under 735 ILCS 5/13-202. Miss that deadline and it doesn’t matter how strong your case was. It’s over.

The clock matters for another reason too. Truck companies have their own investigators and incident response teams, and they start building their version of events within hours of the crash, not weeks. Getting an attorney who can send a legal hold letter, pull the truck’s black box data, and bring in an independent reconstructionist before that evidence gets lost or overwritten is one of the highest-value moves you can make early on.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who decides my fault percentage if the case settles instead of going to trial?

You and your attorney negotiate it directly with the insurer, using the same evidence a jury would eventually see, rather than having a judge or jury assign it formally.

Can my fault percentage change as the case develops?

Yes. Early estimates based on a police report often shift once ECM data, dashcam footage, and expert reconstruction are available, sometimes significantly in either direction.

Does it matter which state’s comparative fault rule applies if the trucking company is based elsewhere?

Generally, Illinois law applies to a crash that happened on Illinois roads regardless of where the trucking company is headquartered, though out-of-state carriers sometimes attempt to remove a case to federal court.

What if two different juries might reasonably see the fault split differently?

That uncertainty is exactly why most cases settle. Both sides are pricing in the risk of an unfavorable jury outcome, which is part of what makes strong evidence so valuable in negotiations, not just at trial.

Can passengers in my vehicle recover even if I was found partly at fault?

Generally yes. A passenger’s own recovery is not reduced by the driver’s fault percentage, since the passenger typically did not contribute to causing the crash.

If I was found partly at fault, does that affect how much time I have to file?

No. The two-year filing deadline under 735 ILCS 5/13-202 runs the same regardless of anyone’s eventual fault percentage. Fault is decided after a case is filed and investigated, not before.

Can the trucking company use my own insurance company’s initial estimate against me?

It can try. An early estimate from your own insurer, made before a full investigation, is not a binding admission of fault and can be challenged with better evidence gathered afterward.

Talk to a Chicago Attorney for a Free Consultation

If you or a family member has been affected by a truck crash in Illinois, even if you believe you may share some fault, the attorneys at Phillips Law Offices are here to help. Call (312) 346-4262 or contact us online for a free, no-obligation consultation. We analyze fault allocation honestly, challenge blame-shifting tactics with evidence, and work to maximize the recovery available to you under Illinois law.

Attorney Advertising. This page provides general information about Illinois law and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines and outcomes depend on the specific facts of your case — speak to a licensed Illinois attorney about your situation.