Anyone who drives a car or a large truck must exercise reasonable care while driving. When the driver does not, it is considered negligent. In most states, if a truck driver is operating his or her vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, he or she is automatically considered negligent.

The important issue is whether the drinking caused the accident. If the car driver was drinking when hit by the truck, the focus will be whether the truck driver was negligent at all. If the truck driver was negligent, the automobile driver who was under the influence would most likely have his or her damages reduced by an amount proportional to how much his or her own negligence was a cause of the accident. Many states have “comparative negligence” or “comparative fault” laws. This means that your damages will be diminished by the percentage of your damages you caused to yourself. So, if your damages are determined to be $10,000, but because you were drinking, you are considered 50% at fault, the truck driver (or his insurer) will only be responsible for paying $5,000 of your damages.

The problem with drinking and driving (settlement-wise) is that a drunk driver doesn’t make a very sympathetic plaintiff. For example, let’s say that the injured party was drinking. He cuts off a semi that is speeding. Had the truck driver not been speeding, he would have been able to avoid hitting the other car. However, the insurance company knows that the drunk driver is not going to make a sympathetic witness if the case were ever to go to court. They also know that juries are less sympathetic to drivers who are breaking the law (in this case, driving while intoxicated). The insurance company knows that it can offer a lower amount and that the plaintiff will not be able to put his strongest case forward. Consequently, the ability to obtain a high settlement in a case like this is unlikely.