The legal fight between Tracy Morgan and Wal-Mart over the deadly crash with a Wal-Mart truck turned testy when the retail giant blamed the actor for his own injuries because he wasn't wearing a seat belt.
Morgan was badly injured in a June 7 collision on the New Jersey Turnpike when he and several others were returning from a performance.
"[P]laintiffs' injuries, if any, were caused, in whole or in part, by plaintiffs' failure to properly wear an available seatbelt restraint device,"
reads Wal-Mart's response, according to The Hollywood Reporter. "By failing to exercise ordinary care in making use of available seatbelts, upon information and belief, plaintiffs acted unreasonably and in disregard of plaintiffs' own best interests. Accordingly, all or a portion of the injuries could have been diminished or minimized by the exercise or reasonable conduct in using their available seatbelts."
Morgan and those hurt in the crash are suing Wal-Mart, claiming the company was negligent for allegedly allowing driver Kevin Roper to haul hundreds of miles while tired. According to the National Transportation Safety Board, Roper was driving 65 mph in a 45 mph construction zone just before he smashed into a limousine van carrying Morgan.
Roper has pleaded not guilty to charges of death by auto and assault by auto. Morgan's suit alleges Roper had driven 700 miles from his home in Jonesboro, Georgia, to a Wal-Mart facility in Smyrna, Delaware, before starting his shift.
"Wal-Mart was careless and negligent in the ownership and operation of its motor vehicle, which caused Mr. Morgan to suffer severe personal injuries," the complaint read, THR said. The complaint also asserts that Wal-Mart "knew or should have known" that Roper had been awake "for more than 24 consecutive hours" prior to the accident, a violation of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulations.
Beyond the seatbelt claims, Wal-Mart's response cited a section of transportation law as limiting the dissemination of investigative information.
"Accordingly, absent entry of a Protective Order and adequate protections by the Court to maintain the confidential nature of Wal-Mart's responses as required by the NTSB on-going investigation, Wal-Mart is unable to admit or deny" certain allegations in the suit.
Wal-Mart also disputes the notion that it was the proximate cause of the incident, and argued that it doesn't have control over third parties who may have caused damages.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.