A motorcycle rider is traveling down Interstate 24 near Chattanooga Tennessee at about 1:50 AM in the morning. Witnesses report that he is traveling in excess of 100 mph, and that he exits off the interstate traveling at a high rate of speed. As the motorcycle rider exits off the interstate he heads onto the highway apparently headed back to the area of his home. The street sweeping crew is sweeping the highway when the motorcycle collides with the rear or the side of a dump truck that is part of the street sweeping crew. The motorcycle rider is killed in the accident.

The motorcycle rider files a complaint in Hamilton County Circuit Court seeking damages against the street sweeper. There are numerous allegations in the complaint, one being that the street sweeping crew was making an illegal U-turn that caused the accident. An answer to the complaint is filed by the attorneys representing the street sweeping crew alleging that the plaintiff caused his own death by traveling at an excessive rate of speed on the night of the accident, therefore not giving him time to respond to the warning lights on the street sweeper, and other vehicles as part of the crew. Therefore, the plaintiff/motorcycle rider caused his own death.

The lawsuit proceeded in Hamilton County Circuit Court, with the street sweeper filing a Motion for Summary Judgment alleging that there was no disputed fact as to the comparative fault of the motorcycle rider and that witnesses testified consistently that he was traveling at a high rate of speed. During the discovery phase of trial, the defendants took the deposition of the investigating officer who was qualified as an expert testifying that speed an inexperienced with the cause of the motorcycle riders death. The plaintiff alleged by expert testimony that the street sweeper actually turned in front of the motorcycle rider as he was coming off the interstate, causing the accident. The defendant responded by stating that the street sweeper did not turn from it the motorcycle rider, but that by the testimony of the sole eyewitness at the motorcycle rider was coming off the interstate at a high rate of speed, crossover several lanes of traffic to the left, and collided with the street sweeping crew which was making a permissible U-turn under its contract with the state of Tennessee to clean the streets of the area. This testimony, according to the defendant, coupled with the testimony of the only investigating officer that speed an inexperienced was the cause of the accident warded summary judgment.

The parties conducted discovery of the facts, the plaintiff responded to the Motion for Summary Judgment, and the parties ultimately agreed to mediation. At the time of the agreement on mediation, the defendants maintained at the motorcycle rider was solely at fault due to the high rate of speed in which he was traveling. The defendant also stated that the motorcycle rider traveled across several lanes of traffic colliding with the street sweeping crew and had he been traveling at a safe speed, he would have lived. The plaintiff alleged that the street sweeper is turned in front of the motorcycle rider, and that the speed would not have made a difference on whether the motorcycle rider could have avoided the accident.

 At mediation case settled for $125,000. After the mediation, the court entered an order distributing the settlement funds.