Top 8 Judicial Hellhole Map for Trucking
Recent research conducted by Marathon Strategies analyzed nearly 900 cases dating back to 2009 – 2023, revealing a staggering combined total of $169 billion in awarded damages and coined a new term for them called “Thermonuclear verdicts.” These kind of verdicts are becoming increasingly common in state and federal courts across the country and further highlights the attention that Judicial Hellholes is brings on this subject.
Nuclear Verdicts Continue to Grow
So, what is a nuclear verdict?
For purposes of the research discussed here, a nuclear verdict generally refers to a jury award of $10 million or more. A thermonuclear verdict is generally used to describe an award exceeding $100 million.
The newest research from Marathon Strategies found 190 corporate nuclear verdicts during 2025. That was a 40.7% increase in the number of cases compared with 2024 and the highest annual number Marathon has identified since it began tracking the data in 2009.
Those verdicts totaled more than $25.6 billion. More than 40 exceeded $100 million, and four exceeded $1 billion.
These numbers cover corporate defendants across many industries, so they should not be interpreted as trucking-only statistics. Still, the trend matters to transportation companies because serious commercial vehicle crashes can involve claims over driver conduct, company policies, maintenance practices, hiring, supervision and training.
According to ATRF, and as anyone with any sense knows, most judges throughout the country strive to be fair and balanced, though it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the bunch. And, with predatory plaintiff lawyers using reptile theory to get otherwise logical jurors stirred into a frenzy, the problem is only made worse.
That makes accident prevention and documentation increasingly important long before a lawsuit is filed.
What Changed on the 2025-2026 Judicial Hellhole Map?
The current list includes eight jurisdictions:
- Los Angeles
- New York City
- South Carolina Asbestos
- Louisiana Coastal Litigation
- Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas
- St. Louis
- Cook, Madison & St. Clair Counties, Illinois
- King County & Washington Supreme Court
Several jurisdictions from last year’s Top 10 did not simply disappear. Georgia, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the Michigan Supreme Court moved to ATRF’s Watch List. Texas also appears on the current Watch List.
That distinction is important because the Judicial Hellholes report ranks specific cities, counties and courts. It does not necessarily label an entire state the same way.
#1 LOS ANGELES
What Changed
California ranked fifth in the previous report. For 2025-2026, ATRF narrowed its focus to Los Angeles and moved the jurisdiction all the way to number one.
Nuclear Verdicts and Auto Cases
ATRF points to California’s history of large verdicts as one of the biggest concerns. Between 2013 and 2022, California recorded 199 nuclear verdicts in personal injury and wrongful death litigation, totaling more than $9 billion.
Los Angeles accounted for more than one-third of those awards.
This is particularly relevant to transportation companies because auto-accident cases represented about 35% of California’s nuclear verdicts during that period.
The current report also highlights litigation involving ADA accessibility, Proposition 65, privacy claims, employment cases and arbitration agreements.
Important 2026 California Update
There has also been a significant development since the 2025-2026 Judicial Hellholes report was released.
The previous version of this article discussed the Gilead Tenofovir Cases and a California appellate ruling that allowed a negligence theory sometimes described as a “duty to innovate.”
That is no longer current.
On August 3, 2026, the California Supreme Court reversed the lower court. The court held that the pharmaceutical manufacturer could not be held liable under that theory for injuries allegedly caused by a product the plaintiffs conceded was not defective.
It is a good example of why these rankings need to be reviewed regularly. The legal environment continues to change after the annual report is published.
#2 NEW YORK CITY
New York City remains in the number two position.
ATRF continues to focus heavily on allegations of litigation fraud that have surfaced through RICO lawsuits involving plaintiffs’ firms, medical providers and other parties.
These are allegations being litigated in court, so they should not be treated as proof that every claim or lawsuit filed in New York is fraudulent. The broader concern raised by ATRF is the number of cases revealing alleged staged accidents, questionable injury claims and other potentially abusive practices.
The current report also points to nuclear verdicts, asbestos litigation and lawsuits where plaintiffs allegedly suffered no concrete injury.
Website-accessibility litigation under the Americans with Disabilities Act is another issue. New York led the nation in federal ADA Title III website-accessibility lawsuits during 2024, according to figures cited by ATRF.
For trucking companies, the biggest takeaway remains the overall litigation environment. Fleets operating in and around New York City should make sure safety policies are followed consistently and that training, maintenance and driver qualification records can be produced when needed.
#3 SOUTH CAROLINA ASBESTOS
South Carolina Asbestos remains number three, but the concerns cited by ATRF have expanded.
All South Carolina asbestos litigation is assigned to former South Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Jean Toal, who has overseen the docket since 2017.
ATRF has been highly critical of several rulings involving discovery sanctions, evidentiary decisions, receiverships and post-verdict actions in these cases. The Foundation says sources reported a roughly 300% increase in South Carolina asbestos filings between 2024 and 2025.
The current report also focuses heavily on the appointment of receivers over corporate entities, including companies located outside the United States.
Because many of ATRF’s descriptions involve disputed litigation and criticism of judicial decisions, those claims are best understood as ATRF’s assessment of the court rather than an independent finding that every ruling is improper.
The South Carolina section is not directly centered on trucking. However, it remains relevant to fleets because it illustrates how local procedural and evidentiary rules can significantly affect corporate defendants.
#4 LOUISIANA COASTAL LITIGATION
Louisiana may have one of the biggest changes on the entire list.
The previous report ranked Louisiana number ten based on several statewide litigation concerns. The new report narrows its ranked designation to Louisiana Coastal Litigation and moves it to number four.
The litigation involves more than 40 lawsuits filed by Louisiana parishes against oil and gas companies over alleged environmental damage along the state’s coast.
The first case to reach trial produced a $744 million verdict against Chevron-related companies in Plaquemines Parish in April 2025.
Major 2026 Supreme Court Update
There has been an important development since ATRF published its current report.
On April 17, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish.
The Court vacated the lower court judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings. The Supreme Court concluded that Chevron had plausibly established the relationship required to seek removal under the federal-officer removal statute because some of the challenged oil production was connected to federal wartime activities.
This was a procedural ruling concerning whether the litigation could be removed to federal court. It did not decide the underlying environmental claims or determine who is ultimately liable for coastal damage.
Interestingly, Louisiana also appears separately on ATRF’s Watch List because the state enacted civil justice reforms in 2025. ATRF says it is watching how Louisiana courts implement those changes.
#5 PHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Pennsylvania held the number one position in the previous report as a combination of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas and Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
That has changed.
For 2025-2026, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas is ranked number five by itself. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has moved to the Watch List.
ATRF continues to cite Philadelphia’s history of large verdicts and mass-tort litigation. Two of the ten largest corporate verdicts in 2024 came from the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, including a $2.2 billion product-liability award involving Roundup.
The number of major trials declined during 2025, although ATRF cautions against assuming that means the underlying litigation climate has permanently changed.
New mass-tort proceedings are also being created through Philadelphia’s Complex Litigation Center.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s move to the Watch List reflects a more mixed picture. ATRF praised a venue decision involving forum non conveniens that could help limit cases filed in Philadelphia when the dispute has little connection to the city. At the same time, the Foundation remains concerned about arbitration and several pending cases.
#6 ST. LOUIS
St. Louis moved from number seven to number six.
This section deserves particular attention from trucking companies because one of the major verdicts discussed by ATRF involved a commercial trailer manufacturer.
In 2024, a St. Louis jury returned a $462 million verdict against Wabash National following a fatal underride crash. Approximately $450 million of the original award consisted of punitive damages.
The trial court later reduced the overall award to approximately $120 million. Wabash ultimately settled the litigation in October 2025 rather than continuing the appeal.
ATRF also points to litigation involving Roundup, premature-infant formula and asbestos claims. ADA accessibility lawsuits are another growing issue cited in the current report.
The Wabash case is particularly relevant to transportation companies because it demonstrates how a vehicle-related lawsuit can grow far beyond the economic damages associated with the original accident.
That does not mean every commercial vehicle case in St. Louis will produce an unusually large verdict. It does reinforce the value of having safety policies, maintenance documentation and training records in order before something goes wrong.
#7 COOK, MADISON & ST. CLAIR COUNTIES, ILLINOIS
Cook County was number six in the previous report.
The 2025-2026 report expands the designation to include Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties and ranks the combined jurisdiction number seven.
Asbestos litigation is one of ATRF’s biggest concerns. The Foundation reports that Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties together accounted for more than 47% of asbestos filings nationwide during 2024.
Madison and St. Clair Counties ranked especially high for asbestos filings, while Cook County continues to handle a large volume of civil litigation.
The report also discusses consumer class actions and cases involving genetic information. Litigation involving specialized baby formula for premature infants is another major issue.
For transportation companies, the broader takeaway is similar to the other jurisdictions on the list. Illinois courts can present different procedural and liability issues than neighboring states, so fleets should avoid assuming that a safety or litigation strategy developed for one jurisdiction automatically applies everywhere they operate.
#8 KING COUNTY & WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT
King County ranked ninth in the previous report.
The 2025-2026 report expands the designation to include both King County and the Washington Supreme Court and moves the jurisdiction to number eight.
One of the biggest developments involved litigation over PCB exposure at the Sky Valley Education Center.
In October 2025, the Washington Supreme Court reinstated a $185 million verdict involving three teachers who alleged that PCB exposure from aging fluorescent light fixtures caused health problems.
The verdict included $50 million in compensatory damages and $135 million in punitive damages.
ATRF has also criticized Washington courts over choice-of-law decisions, asbestos liability and climate-related litigation.
Like South Carolina, much of this litigation is not transportation specific. The value for trucking companies is understanding that the Judicial Hellholes list is really a map of broader civil-litigation trends. Those same courts may eventually hear commercial vehicle, employment or other claims involving fleet operators.
The 2025-2026 Judicial Hellholes Watch List
The Watch List may actually contain some of the most important changes for trucking companies this year.
GEORGIA: NO LONGER IN THE TOP EIGHT
Georgia was number four in the previous report and had ranked near the top of the list for several years.
That changed after Governor Brian Kemp signed SB 68 and SB 69 on April 21, 2025.
SB 68 changed several areas of Georgia civil litigation. Among other provisions, the law changed how medical damages can be presented, addressed anchoring arguments for noneconomic damages and allows seatbelt-use evidence in vehicle cases.
It also changed premises-liability rules and created procedures allowing liability and damages to be handled separately in certain trials.
SB 69 regulates third-party litigation financing.
These laws have now taken effect, so the old language in this article saying “if passed” should no longer be used.
Georgia has not completely disappeared from ATRF’s radar. Cobb, Fulton and Gwinnett Counties are now specifically listed on the Watch List while ATRF evaluates how courts implement the reforms.
PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court moved from the ranked list to the Watch List.
ATRF cited a positive venue decision while continuing to monitor arbitration-related decisions and several pending cases.
Philadelphia itself remains ranked number five.
TEXAS
Texas deserves special attention from transportation companies.
The previous version of this article focused on the Texas Court of Appeals for the Fifth District and discussed HB 19 as one reason Texas had remained outside the primary Judicial Hellholes rankings.
The situation has changed.
The 2025-2026 report places Texas as a whole on the Watch List. ATRF points primarily to nuclear verdicts and developing trends in trial courts.
Texas is still not one of the eight jurisdictions on the current Judicial Hellholes list, but saying Texas has completely avoided the report would no longer be accurate.
MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT
The Michigan Supreme Court ranked number eight last year and has now moved to the Watch List.
ATRF continues to monitor employer-liability decisions and several important pending cases, but the court is no longer part of the eight primary Judicial Hellholes.
LOUISIANA
Louisiana presents an unusual situation.
Louisiana Coastal Litigation is ranked number four, while Louisiana more broadly appears on the Watch List.
The distinction reflects reforms adopted by the Louisiana legislature in 2025 and ATRF’s decision to watch how courts apply them while continuing to highlight the separate coastal-litigation cases.
KENTUCKY
Kentucky returns to the Watch List after a one-year absence.
ATRF cites large verdicts and decisions that it believes expand liability as reasons for continuing to watch the state’s courts.
Why This Matters to Trucking Companies
A Judicial Hellholes ranking does not mean a trucking company automatically loses a lawsuit there. It also does not mean every judge or jury within that jurisdiction handles cases the same way.
What it does provide is another piece of information for risk managers, safety departments and transportation attorneys to consider.
A trucking company cannot control every place its equipment travels, but it can control a lot of what happens before an accident.
Driver training should be documented. Company policies should be enforced consistently. Corrective coaching should be recorded instead of handled informally and forgotten.
Maintenance and inspection records also need to be easy to retrieve.
The same applies after an accident. Photos, video, witness information and other evidence can disappear surprisingly quickly. Having a clearly defined response procedure gives drivers and managers a better chance of preserving important information.
Our accident prevention training and legal defense resources are designed around that proactive approach.
Training cannot make a company lawsuit-proof, and documentation does not guarantee a particular legal outcome. What they can do is help a fleet build consistent safety practices and maintain records showing what was assigned, completed and documented.
HOW INFINITI CAN HELP
As trucking companies face escalating challenges, including rising liability costs, nuclear verdicts trucking, and complex litigation environments in judicial hellholes, INFINITI can help mitigate some of these hurdles through effective safety training and record-keeping solutions.
The legal environment surrounding commercial transportation continues to change, but the basic safety strategy remains pretty simple: prevent the accidents you can prevent and document the work you are already doing.
INFINITI Fleet Safety Training gives companies a centralized system for assigning training, tracking completion and maintaining training records.
Our truck driver safety training programs cover accident prevention, defensive driving, regulatory topics and other areas that safety departments deal with every day.
Companies can also upload their own policies and training materials so drivers receive company-specific instruction alongside INFINITI’s training library.
That helps create consistency across terminals and locations while giving managers a clearer record of what training employees have received.
No training platform can eliminate litigation risk. However, a structured safety program can help fleets reduce preventable incidents, reinforce company expectations and keep better documentation when questions arise later.
FAQs
What is the current Judicial Hellhole Map for 2025-2026?
The current Judicial Hellholes report identifies eight jurisdictions: Los Angeles, New York City, South Carolina Asbestos, Louisiana Coastal Litigation, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, St. Louis, Cook/Madison/St. Clair Counties in Illinois, and King County together with the Washington Supreme Court. The list is produced annually by the American Tort Reform Foundation. It is ATRF’s assessment of civil-litigation conditions and should not be confused with an official state or federal government designation.
What changed from the 2024-2025 Judicial Hellholes list?
There were several major changes. Los Angeles replaced California as the California jurisdiction and moved from the state’s previous number-five position to number one. Georgia and the Michigan Supreme Court moved off the primary list and onto the Watch List. Pennsylvania was split, with the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas ranking fifth while the Pennsylvania Supreme Court moved to the Watch List. Louisiana Coastal Litigation moved to number four, and the Illinois and Washington entries were expanded to include additional courts and counties.
Is Judicial Hellholes an official government ranking?
No. Judicial Hellholes® is a program of the American Tort Reform Foundation and the term is a registered trademark associated with the American Tort Reform Association. The rankings represent ATRF’s analysis and opinions about courts and civil justice systems. They are not ratings issued by the federal government, state governments or the court system itself. That distinction is important when using the information for fleet risk management. The report can provide useful context, but companies should also rely on their attorneys, insurance providers and jurisdiction-specific legal advice.
Why should trucking companies pay attention to Judicial Hellholes?
Trucking companies routinely operate across multiple jurisdictions, and a serious commercial vehicle accident can result in litigation far from a fleet’s headquarters. Different courts may apply different state laws, evidentiary standards and procedural rules. Large verdict trends can also influence insurance markets and settlement strategies. The Judicial Hellholes report gives fleet managers another source of information about changing litigation environments. It should not replace legal advice, but it can help safety departments understand why consistent policies, driver training, documentation and accident-response procedures matter across the entire operation.
What is a nuclear verdict in trucking?
A nuclear verdict generally refers to a jury award of $10 million or more. The term is commonly used in trucking because serious commercial vehicle accidents can produce large claims involving catastrophic injuries or wrongful death. These lawsuits may involve more than the driver’s actions. Plaintiffs may examine hiring procedures, training records, maintenance history and company safety policies. Marathon Strategies reported 190 corporate nuclear verdicts during 2025 across all industries, totaling more than $25.6 billion. Those figures are not trucking-only statistics, but they demonstrate the broader growth of high-dollar corporate verdicts.
Is Texas a Judicial Hellhole?
Texas is not one of the eight jurisdictions on ATRF’s 2025-2026 Judicial Hellholes list. However, Texas is now included on ATRF’s Watch List. That is an important change from the previous version of this article, which focused primarily on the Texas Court of Appeals for the Fifth District. ATRF says it is monitoring trial-court trends and nuclear verdicts across the state. For trucking companies, that means Texas remains an important jurisdiction to watch even though it does not currently carry one of the report’s eight primary Judicial Hellholes designations.
What happened to Georgia on the Judicial Hellholes list?
Georgia moved from number four on the 2024-2025 list to the Watch List following major tort-reform legislation. Governor Brian Kemp signed SB 68 and SB 69 on April 21, 2025. The reforms addressed several areas relevant to civil litigation, including medical-damage evidence, noneconomic-damage arguments, seatbelt evidence, premises liability and third-party litigation financing. ATRF is now focusing specifically on Cobb, Fulton and Gwinnett Counties while evaluating how Georgia courts apply the new laws. Georgia’s removal from the primary list does not mean litigation risk has disappeared, but the regulatory environment has materially changed.
Why does Louisiana appear as both a Judicial Hellhole and on the Watch List?
The report treats Louisiana Coastal Litigation separately from Louisiana’s broader civil justice system. Louisiana Coastal Litigation ranks number four because ATRF continues to highlight more than 40 environmental lawsuits filed by parishes against oil and gas companies. At the same time, Louisiana appears on the Watch List because the state legislature passed reforms in 2025 that ATRF believes may address other civil-litigation concerns. In other words, the coastal cases remain a ranked concern while the Foundation is monitoring whether statewide reforms improve other parts of Louisiana’s litigation environment.
Are there special driver-training requirements in Judicial Hellhole jurisdictions?
No federal driver-training requirement is triggered simply because ATRF places a city, county or court on its Judicial Hellholes list. Commercial drivers and motor carriers must still comply with applicable federal regulations and any state-specific requirements that apply to their operations. The ranking itself does not create a new FMCSA training mandate. However, companies operating across multiple jurisdictions may choose to strengthen their safety training, documentation and accident-response procedures as part of their broader risk-management program. Legal counsel should be consulted when a company needs advice about jurisdiction-specific liability or documentation requirements.
Can safety training prevent a nuclear verdict?
No training program can guarantee that a company will avoid a lawsuit or nuclear verdict. Safety training works further upstream. Its primary purpose is to improve driver behavior, reinforce company policies and reduce preventable incidents. Good documentation can also establish what training was assigned and completed if questions arise later. Those records may become important during an audit, insurance review or litigation. Training should be part of a larger safety system that includes enforcement of policies, driver qualification, maintenance practices and meaningful corrective action when unsafe behavior is identified.
What records should trucking companies maintain to reduce litigation risk?
Fleets should maintain complete records of driver training and company policies, along with documentation showing when employees received and completed required assignments. Corrective coaching and disciplinary action should also be documented consistently. Maintenance, inspection and driver qualification records need to be organized and retrievable. Accident-response procedures should address preservation of photographs, video, witness information and other evidence. Record-retention requirements vary depending on the document and applicable regulation, so fleets should coordinate their retention policies with qualified transportation counsel and their insurance providers rather than relying on one universal retention schedule.
Should a trucking company change its insurance because it operates in a Judicial Hellhole?
A Judicial Hellholes ranking by itself is not enough information to determine appropriate insurance limits. A fleet’s coverage should reflect its equipment, operating territory, freight, loss history and overall exposure. Large-verdict trends in jurisdictions where a company frequently operates can be one factor in that discussion. Motor carriers should review liability limits and excess coverage with an insurance professional who understands commercial transportation. Transportation counsel can also help identify legal exposures that may not be obvious from an insurance policy alone. The goal is to understand the company’s actual risk rather than making coverage decisions based solely on a ranking.
How often is the Judicial Hellholes report updated?
ATRF publishes a new Judicial Hellholes report annually. As of September 2026, the 2025-2026 report remains the current annual ranking. Because significant court decisions can happen between annual reports, fleet managers should not rely solely on the date of the report. California’s 2026 Gilead decision and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2026 Louisiana coastal-litigation decision are good examples. Both materially changed legal issues discussed in the annual report after it had already been published.
