CDL violations and Georgia truck accident cases

A CDL violation matters in a Georgia truck case in two ways: as evidence against the driver, and as proof of what the carrier allowed. Under 49 C.F.R. § 383.37, an employer may not let a person drive if it “knows or should reasonably know” of a license problem. The plaintiff still has to connect the violation to this crash, and that is where these claims are won or lost.

What each license covers

Georgia’s classes are in § 40-5-150.

Class	Vehicle	Example
A	Combination of 26,001 pounds or more, towing more than 10,000 pounds	Tractor-trailer
B	Single vehicle of 26,001 pounds or more, towing no more than 10,000 pounds	Dump truck, large box truck
C	Smaller vehicle under the conditions in that section	Some passenger or hazardous material vehicles

That section also lists endorsements: H for hazardous materials, T for double and triple trailers, P for 16 or more passengers, N for tank vehicles, S for school buses, X for hazardous material and tank combined, and an L restriction for vehicles without air brakes. It says no one shall drive a vehicle requiring an endorsement unless the proper endorsement appears on the license.

Five problems to look for

No valid license. Section 40-5-146 bars operating without a license valid for the vehicle, and while suspended, revoked, canceled, or disqualified.

Major offenses. The federal table in § 383.51(b) disqualifies for offenses such as being under the influence and having a blood alcohol concentration at the listed level. A first conviction means one year, or three years in the hazardous material case, and a second means life. Georgia’s § 40-5-151 carries similar periods, and it lets the department reduce a life term in defined circumstances.

Serious traffic violations. The federal Table 2 counts convictions in separate incidents within a three-year period: 60 days for a second and 120 days for a third. Georgia’s list in § 40-5-142(22) includes speeding 15 or more miles per hour over the limit, reckless driving, following too closely, improper lane changes, and device violations under § 40-6-241. Both reach some offenses in a personal vehicle, so a driver’s record off the job can count. Read the conditions before treating one as a disqualifier.

Medical certification. Under § 391.41, a person must not operate a commercial vehicle unless medically certified as physically qualified. Driver qualification files covers how the carrier documents it.

Clearinghouse status. Under § 382.701(d), no employer may allow a safety-sensitive function if a query shows a verified positive, adulterated, or substituted drug result, an alcohol confirmation at 0.04 or higher, a refusal, or a reported actual-knowledge violation. Query records must be kept for three years under (e). A carrier’s duty to query is separate from the November 18, 2024 date that applies to state licensing agencies, which drug and alcohol testing explains.

The carrier’s own rule

Circumstance in § 383.37	Question for discovery
No current license, or wrong class or endorsement	Did the carrier match the license to this truck and load?
Disqualified, or loss of the right to operate	When did the carrier last check?
More than one license	Did the record show another state's license?
Out-of-service order	Was driver, truck, or carrier under an order?

The standard reaches what a carrier “should reasonably know”, so the file and the annual review are direct evidence. Section 391.15 adds that a carrier shall not require or permit a disqualified driver to drive.

Section 34-7-20 supplies the Georgia duty of ordinary care in selecting employees and not retaining them after knowledge of incompetency. Those direct claims remain available when the carrier admits employment, under Quynn v. Hulsey, 310 Ga. 473 (2020). In Onsite Communication Services v. Gooch, A26A0424 (2026), knowledge of drug use and speeding tickets went to a fact question.

When the violation did not cause the crash

A license problem can be real and still irrelevant. A violated regulation can support negligence per se under § 51-1-6, but that “supplies only the duty and breach of duty elements”, as Central Anesthesia v. Worthy, 254 Ga. 728 (1985), says. Parker v. R & L Carriers, 253 Ga. App. 628 (2002), turned on just that gap.

Violation	Crash	Link
Disqualification for a DUI	Driver impaired again	Direct
Serious following-too-closely convictions	Rear-end crash	Direct, through the known habit
Missing tank endorsement	Tank surge in a curve	Possible, if the testing would have addressed it
Missing tank endorsement	Car ran a red light	None
Expired license by a few days	Unrelated lane change	Weak

For example, imagine a carrier that overlooked a disqualification for repeated speeding, and a crash in which its driver was speeding again. That is a better claim than one where the same driver was stopped when hit.

Records that show it

• The state driver record, and the interstate record through the Commercial Driver’s License Information System.
• The carrier’s copy of the license, and its date of review.
• The qualification file and annual review notes.
• Clearinghouse queries and consent records.
• Out-of-service orders and inspection reports.
• Internal discipline and retraining records.

A certified state record may be needed for trial, and a conviction’s use depends on the plea and the purpose. Driver liability covers how a ticket and its disposition work. Fault is divided under § 51-12-33, and the two-year period in § 9-3-33 applies to injury claims.

Sources

• 49 C.F.R. § 382.701
• 49 C.F.R. § 383.37
• 49 C.F.R. § 383.51
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.15
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.41
• Official Code of Georgia Annotated, November 2022 public release: §§ 9-3-33, 34-7-20, 40-5-142, 40-5-146, 40-5-150, 40-5-151, 40-6-241, 51-1-6, 51-12-33
• Quynn v. Hulsey, 310 Ga. 473
• Onsite Communication Services v. Gooch, A26A0424
• Central Anesthesia v. Worthy, 254 Ga. 728
• Parker v. R & L Carriers, 253 Ga. App. 628

This page was last reviewed in November 2026 for general information. Laws and court decisions can change after that date. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.