South Carolina
Truck Accident Laws in South Carolina (2026): Deadlines & Liability
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 16, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 16, 2026. · 8 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

A crash with a large commercial truck in South Carolina is governed by two layers of law at once: South Carolina's own rules on deadlines, fault, and insurance, and a thick set of federal safety regulations that apply to interstate trucking companies and their drivers. Together they shape who can be held responsible and how long you have to act. This page explains both, as general legal information rather than legal advice.
The deadline to sue in South Carolina
South Carolina's statute of limitations for injury to the person is three years from the date of the injury under S.C. Code Ann. 15-3-530(5). A wrongful-death action arising from a fatal truck crash is also subject to a three-year limit under 15-3-530(6), generally running from the date of death. South Carolina also recognizes a discovery rule under 15-3-535, so in some cases the clock starts when the injured person knew or reasonably should have known of the claim, though in a truck collision the injury is usually apparent at once.
A few situations change the deadline. The period can be tolled for an injured minor or a legally incompetent person. If a city, county, or state agency is a defendant, the South Carolina Tort Claims Act imposes its own shorter notice and limitation rules, so those claims demand fast action. Because exceptions are narrow and courts enforce the deadline strictly, the safest course is to treat three years as a hard limit and act well before it.
How fault works: South Carolina's 51% bar
South Carolina uses modified comparative negligence. In Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co. (1991), the South Carolina Supreme Court replaced the old contributory-negligence rule and held that, for causes of action arising on or after July 1, 1991, a plaintiff may recover if his or her negligence is not greater than the defendant's. Your damages are reduced in proportion to your own share of fault, and if you are found more than 50% at fault, you recover nothing. A plaintiff who is 50% at fault can still recover half the damages, but at 51% the recovery is barred entirely.
The court also explained that when there is more than one defendant, the plaintiff's negligence is compared to the combined negligence of all defendants. In a truck case that can mean fault is divided among the driver, the motor carrier, and others, which makes identifying every responsible party important to a full recovery.
No-fault status: South Carolina is an at-fault state
South Carolina is not a no-fault state. It does not require personal injury protection (PIP) coverage, and there is no statutory injury threshold you must cross before you can sue. Instead, the driver and company at fault for the crash are directly responsible for the resulting harm, and you pursue them (and their insurers) for medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering, and other losses. This is a meaningful difference from no-fault states, where an injured person first turns to their own PIP coverage and must clear a threshold before stepping outside the no-fault system.

Damage caps in South Carolina
South Carolina places no general statutory cap on compensatory damages in an ordinary personal-injury or wrongful-death case, so economic losses such as medical bills and lost income and noneconomic losses such as pain and suffering are not statutorily limited. Punitive damages are treated differently: South Carolina law generally caps punitive damages at the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000 under S.C. Code Ann. 15-32-530, with exceptions that raise or remove the cap, including for a defendant who was impaired by alcohol or drugs at the time. Different caps apply in the narrow context of claims against government entities under the Tort Claims Act.
Insurance context in South Carolina
South Carolina requires every driver to carry minimum auto liability coverage of $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury, plus $25,000 for property damage, under S.C. Code Ann. 38-77-140, along with matching uninsured-motorist coverage. Those minimums are modest, but a commercial truck operating in interstate commerce is subject to the much higher federal financial-responsibility rules discussed below, which is one reason trucking cases differ from ordinary car crashes.
Federal FMCSA rules that apply to trucking companies
Most large commercial trucks and the companies that run them are regulated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) under Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. These rules set the safety baseline, and a violation can be powerful evidence of negligence:

- Hours of service (49 CFR Part 395): a property-carrying driver may drive no more than 11 hours after 10 consecutive hours off duty, cannot drive beyond the 14th hour after coming on duty, must take a 30-minute break after 8 hours of driving, and is capped at 60 hours in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days.
- Electronic logging devices (49 CFR Part 395): most drivers must record their hours with an ELD, and carriers must retain the data, which can confirm or contradict a fatigue defense.
- Driver qualification and CDL (49 CFR Part 391): carriers must verify a driver's license, medical fitness, and record before putting them on the road.
- Drug and alcohol testing (49 CFR Part 382): carriers must conduct pre-employment, random, and post-accident testing and use the FMCSA Clearinghouse.
- Inspection, repair, and maintenance (49 CFR Part 396): carriers must systematically inspect and maintain their vehicles and keep records.
Who can be liable after a truck crash
A truck case routinely involves more potential defendants than a typical car crash, and many are corporate. Depending on the facts, responsibility may extend to:
- The driver, for negligent driving such as speeding, distraction, or fatigue.
- The motor carrier (trucking company), often vicariously for its driver's on-the-job conduct, and directly for negligent hiring, training, supervision, or retention, or for pressuring drivers past the hours-of-service limits.
- A broker or shipper, in some circumstances.
- A cargo loader, when improper or overweight loading causes or worsens a crash.
- A parts or vehicle manufacturer, when a defective brake, tire, or component contributes.
Identifying every responsible party matters because additional defendants can mean additional insurance coverage and a fuller picture of how the crash happened.
Naming more defendants does not automatically make each of them answerable for the whole award. Under S.C. Code Ann. 15-38-15, joint and several liability does not apply to a defendant whose conduct is determined to be less than fifty percent of the total fault, and that defendant is liable only for its own percentage of the damages. The statute excepts a defendant whose conduct was wilful, wanton, reckless, or intentional, or involved the illegal use, sale, or possession of drugs, and such a defendant remains jointly and severally liable for the full amount. The provision was amended by 2025 Act No. 42, effective January 1, 2026.
Federal minimum insurance for trucks
Under 49 CFR 387.9, a for-hire motor carrier transporting non-hazardous general freight in interstate commerce must maintain at least $750,000 in liability insurance. Carriers hauling certain hazardous materials must carry far more, up to $5,000,000. That $750,000 baseline, set by the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, dwarfs South Carolina's $25,000 minimum for ordinary drivers and is a major reason truck cases are handled differently from car-accident claims.
Why evidence preservation matters early
Much of the proof in a truck case lives in the truck and the carrier's files: ELD and logbook records, the engine control module (the truck's onboard data recorder or black box), maintenance and inspection logs, dispatch records, and the post-accident drug-and-alcohol test. Some of that data can be overwritten or routinely discarded within months. A timely spoliation or evidence-preservation letter to the carrier, sent early, helps ensure this information is kept rather than lost.

How to evaluate a South Carolina truck-accident claim
If you have been injured, preserve what you can: the police report, photographs of the scene and vehicles, the names of witnesses, and your medical records. Get medical care and keep documentation of your treatment and lost income. Many South Carolina personal-injury attorneys evaluate truck cases on a contingency-fee basis and offer a free initial consultation, meaning no upfront fee, though no lawyer can guarantee a result. With a firm three-year deadline and evidence that can disappear, get a free claim review from a South Carolina injury lawyer promptly (attorney advertising).
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue for a truck accident in South Carolina?
Generally three years from the date of the crash for personal-injury claims under S.C. Code Ann. 15-3-530(5), and three years from the date of death for a wrongful-death claim under 15-3-530(6). Claims against a government entity follow the shorter rules of the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, and the period can be tolled in limited situations.
Who can be sued after a truck accident in South Carolina?
Potentially the driver, the motor carrier (often vicariously and for negligent hiring, training, or supervision), a broker or shipper, a cargo loader, and a parts or vehicle manufacturer. Truck cases routinely involve multiple, often corporate, defendants. Under S.C. Code Ann. 15-38-15, however, a defendant found less than fifty percent at fault is generally liable only for its own share of the damages rather than the full award.
How is a truck accident different from a car accident?
Commercial trucks are governed by federal FMCSA safety rules (49 CFR) on hours of service, logging, driver qualification, and maintenance; cases often involve several defendants; key evidence such as ELD and engine-control-module data can be overwritten; and interstate carriers must carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage rather than a typical car policy.
Is South Carolina a no-fault state for truck accidents?
No. South Carolina is an at-fault (tort) state. It does not require PIP coverage and has no injury threshold to clear before suing, so you pursue the at-fault driver and trucking company directly for your losses.
How does fault affect my recovery in South Carolina?
Under South Carolina's modified comparative negligence rule from Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co. (1991), your damages are reduced by your percentage of fault, and you recover nothing if your fault is greater than the defendant's (more than 50%). Your fault is compared to the combined fault of all defendants.
How much is a South Carolina truck accident case worth?
There is no set figure. Value depends on the severity of injuries, medical costs, lost income, the degree of fault, and available insurance. South Carolina places no general cap on compensatory damages, though punitive damages are generally capped with exceptions. No one can guarantee an outcome or amount.
Updates
Added South Carolina's several-liability rule, S.C. Code Ann. 15-38-15, which limits a defendant found less than fifty percent at fault to its own share of the damages, to the section on who can be liable after a truck crash.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
South Carolina Code of Laws, Title 15: CIVIL REMEDIES AND PROCEDURES
§ 15-38-15Liability of tortfeasor responsible for less than fifty per cent of total fault; apportionment; willful or reckless defendant and drug exceptionsIn forcecited in 4 of our articles
(A) In an action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death, or damage to property or to recover damages for economic loss or for noneconomic loss such as mental distress, loss of enjoyment, pain, suffering, loss of reputation, or loss of companionship resulting from tortious conduct, if indivisible damages are determined to be proximately caused by more than one tortfeasor, joint and several liability does not apply to any defendant whose conduct is determined to be less than fifty percent of the total fault for the indivisible damages as compared with the total of: (i) the fault of all the defendants and tortfeasors; and (ii) the fault (comparative negligence), if any, of plaintiff. A defendant whose conduct is determined to be less than fifty percent of the total fault shall only be liable for that percentage of the indivisible damages determined by the jury or trier of fact. (B) Apportionment of percentages of fault among defendants and tortfeasors is to be determined as specified in subsection (C).
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at scstatehouse.gov
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Smith v. Tiffany (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2017, 419 S.C. 548)“…00% of liability only between the parties before it. See S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-38-15 (D) (Supp. 2015); 15-38-40. The impli…”
- Machin v. Carus Corp. (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2017, 419 S.C. 527)“…or any or all of the damages alleged by any other party. S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15 (C)-(D) (Supp. 2015) (emphasis added).…”
- Shannon P. Green v. Edward C. McGee (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2025)“…ble damages determined by the jury or trier of fact. S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15(A) (Supp. 2024); see also Smith v. Tiff…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Carolina Hit and Run Laws: Penalties and What to Do, South Carolina Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence (2026), South Carolina Punitive Damages Laws: Cap Tiers and Proof (2026)
§ 15-3-530Three yearsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
Within three years: (1) an action upon a contract, obligation, or liability, express or implied, excepting those provided for in Section 15-3-520; (2) an action upon a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture; (3) an action for trespass upon or damage to real property; (4) an action for taking, detaining, or injuring any goods or chattels including an action for the specific recovery of personal property; (5) an action for assault, battery, or any injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract and not enumerated by law, and those provided for in Section 15-3-545; (6) an action under Sections 15-51-10 to 15-51-60 for death by wrongful act, the period to begin to run upon the death of the person on account of whose death the action is brought; (7) any action for relief on the ground of fraud in cases which prior to the adoption of the Code of Civil Procedure in 1870 were solely cognizable by the court of chancery, the cause of action in the case not considered to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud; (8) an action on any policy of insurance, either fire or life, whereby any…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at scstatehouse.gov
Cited in 202 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Santee Portland Cement Co. v. Daniel International Corp. (Supreme Court of South Carolina 1989, 299 S.C. 269)“…f contract was barred by the statute of limitations. See S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530 (1) (1976) (six year period in which to…”
- Thomerson v. DeVito (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2020)“…Does the three-year statute of limitations of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530 apply to claims for promissory estoppel…”
- Dean v. Ruscon Corp. (Supreme Court of South Carolina 1996, 321 S.C. 360)“…rior to April 5,1988, . must be commenced within six years. S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530(3) (1976). The discovery rule is applic…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Carolina Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, South Carolina Assault and Battery Laws: Degrees and Penalties (2026), South Carolina Debt Collection Laws: The Wage Garnishment Bar and the Tax-Levy Exception
§ 15-32-530Awards not to exceed certain limits; Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office to calculate adjustments to maximum awards; publication in State RegisterIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(A) Except as provided in subsections (B) and (C), an award of punitive damages may not exceed the greater of three times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to each claimant entitled thereto or the sum of five hundred thousand dollars. (B) The limitation provided in subsection (A) may not be disclosed to the jury. If the jury returns a verdict for punitive damages in excess of the maximum amount specified in subsection (A), the trial court should first determine whether: (1) the wrongful conduct proven under this section was motivated primarily by unreasonable financial gain and determines that the unreasonably dangerous nature of the conduct, together with the high likelihood of injury resulting from the conduct, was known or approved by the managing agent, director, officer, or the person responsible for making policy decisions on behalf of the defendant; or (2) the defendant's actions could subject the defendant to conviction of a felony and that act or course of conduct is a proximate cause of the plaintiff's damages; If the trial court determines that either item (1) or (2) apply, then punitive damages must not exceed the greater of four times the amount of…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at scstatehouse.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Carla Denise Garrison v. Target Corporation (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2022)“…defendant's judgment is substantially impaired. S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-530(A)–(C) (Supp. 2020). We find the langua…”
- Keene v. CNA Holdings, LLC (Court of Appeals of South Carolina 2019, 426 S.C. 357)“…amages and concluded the awards were not excessive. See S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-530 (Supp. 2018) (providing that with cer…”
- Garrison v. Target Corporation (Court of Appeals of South Carolina 2020)“…ive damages ruling as I believe the punitive damages cap of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-530 (Supp. 2019) applies to Garrison's awar…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 15-3-535Limitation on actions commenced under Section 15-3-530(5)In forcecited in 2 of our articles
Except as to actions initiated under Section 15-3-545, all actions initiated under Section 15-3-530(5) must be commenced within three years after the person knew or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known that he had a cause of action.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at scstatehouse.gov
Cited in 40 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Stokes-Craven Holding Corp. v. Robinson (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2016, 416 S.C. 517)“…300 S.C. 182, 186, 386 S.E.2d 798, 800 (Ct. App. 1989); see S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-535 (2005) ("[A]ll actions initiated under…”
- Perry v. Heirs at Law & Distributees of Gadsden (Court of Appeals of South Carolina 1993, 313 S.C. 296)“…bars their action for a share of the proceeds. 4 *302 S.C. Code Ann. §15-3-535 (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1992) provides that…”
- Santee Portland Cement Co. v. Daniel International Corp. (Supreme Court of South Carolina 1989, 299 S.C. 269)“…Gattis decision, the South Carolina legislature enacted S. C. Code Ann. §§ 15-3-535 and 15-3-545 (Supp. 1987). Section 15-3…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Carolina Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability
South Carolina Code of Laws, Title 38: INSURANCE
§ 38-77-140Bodily injury and property damage limits; general requirementsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(A) An automobile insurance policy may not be issued or delivered in this State to the owner of a motor vehicle or may not be issued or delivered by an insurer licensed in this State upon a motor vehicle then principally garaged or principally used in this State, unless it contains a provision insuring the persons defined as insured against loss from the liability imposed by law for damages arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of these motor vehicles within the United States or Canada, subject to limits exclusive of interest and costs, with respect to each motor vehicle, as follows: (1) twenty-five thousand dollars because of bodily injury to one person in any one accident and, subject to the limit for one person; (2) fifty thousand dollars because of bodily injury to two or more persons in any one accident; and (3) twenty-five thousand dollars because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident. (B) Nothing in this article prevents an insurer from issuing, selling, or delivering a policy providing liability coverage in excess of these requirements.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at scstatehouse.gov
Cited in 32 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Williams v. Government Employees Insurance (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2014, 409 S.C. 586)“…S.E.2d 631, 632 (2000). 3 The circuit court noted that S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140 provided for liability coverage with a…”
- Nationwide v. Walls (Supreme Court of South Carolina 2021)“…140—rather than the liability limits stated in the policy. S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140(A)(2) (2015). Safe Auto, Mayfield's ins…”
- Wausau Underwriters Insurance v. Howser (Supreme Court of South Carolina 1992, 309 S.C. 269)“…he ownership, maintenance or use” of an uninsured vehicle. S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140 (1989). Thus, the issue presented is w…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: South Carolina Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim
Code of Federal Regulations Title 49
§ 387.9Financial responsibility, minimum levels.In forcecited in 55 of our articles
The minimum levels of financial responsibility referred to in § 387.7 are hereby prescribed as follows: Table 1 to § 387.9—Schedule of Limits—Public Liability Type of carriage Commodity transported January 1, 1985 (1) For-hire (In interstate or foreign commerce, with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Property (nonhazardous) $750,000 (2) For-hire and Private (In interstate, foreign, or intrastate commerce, with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Hazardous substances, as defined in 49 CFR 171.8, transported in bulk in cargo tanks, portable tanks, or hopper-type vehicles; in bulk Division 1.1, 1.2 or 1.3 materials; in bulk Division 2.3, Hazard Zone A material; in bulk Division 6.1, Packing Group I, Hazard Zone A material, in bulk Division 2.1 or 2.2 material; or highway route controlled quantities of a Class 7 material, as defined in 49 CFR 173.403 5,000,000 (3) For-hire and Private (In interstate or foreign commerce, in any quantity; or in intrastate commerce, in bulk only; with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Oil listed in 49 CFR 172.101; hazardous waste, hazardous materials, or hazardous substances defined in 49…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 45 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Yeates (2009) held an MCS-90 endorsement applies only where the underlying policy gives no coverage and the carrier's insurance falls below the minimums 49 CFR 387.9 prescribes. GREAT WEST CAS. v. General Cas. Co. of Wisconsin (2010) found that purpose met once other coverage exceeded the 387.9 amount.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- GREAT WEST CAS. v. General Cas. Co. of Wisconsin (District Court, D. Minnesota 2010, 734 F. Supp. 2d 718)“…ardous commodities is $750,000. 49 U.S.C. § 31139 (b)(2); 49 C.F.R. § 387.9 . Under the Federal Motor Carrie…”
- Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Yeates (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2009, 584 F.3d 868)✓A trucker's own insurer paid the Yeateses the full $750,000 that section 387.9 sets as the minimum for non-hazardous property, and the en banc court held a second insurer's MCS-90 endorsement was therefore never triggered and added no coverage.
- American Inter-Fidelity Exchange v. American Re-Insurance Company (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 1994, 17 F.3d 1018)✓A truck insurer sought reinsurance for $846,256 in deductibles it paid accident victims but could not collect; the court read the mandatory endorsement to require insurers to cover victims from the first dollar up to section 387.9's minimums, and reversed the dismissal.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Truck Accident Laws by State (2026): Deadlines & Liability, Truck Accident Laws in Alabama (2026): Deadlines & Liability, Truck Accident Laws in Alaska (2026): Deadlines & Liability
Sources and References
- S.C. Code Ann. 15-3-530 (three-year limitation for injuries to the person and wrongful death)(scstatehouse.gov).gov
- Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991) (modified comparative negligence, 51% bar)(courtlistener.com)
- S.C. Code Ann. 38-77-140 (minimum auto liability limits 25/50/25)(scstatehouse.gov).gov
- 49 CFR 387.9 (minimum levels of financial responsibility for motor carriers; $750,000 general freight)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 49 CFR Part 395 (hours of service of drivers; ELD requirements)(ecfr.gov).gov
- FMCSA, Hours of Service of Drivers(fmcsa.dot.gov).gov
- 49 CFR Part 391 (qualifications of drivers)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 49 CFR Part 396 (inspection, repair, and maintenance)(ecfr.gov).gov
- S.C. Code Ann. 15-38-15 (joint and several liability does not apply to a defendant less than fifty percent at fault; exceptions for wilful, wanton, reckless or intentional conduct and illegal drug use; as amended by 2025 Act No. 42, eff. Jan. 1, 2026)(scstatehouse.gov).gov
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.