Impressions from Joe Pappalardo: Insights from a Leading Transportation Defense Attorney
Joe Pappalardo has been a fixture in transportation defense for over 40 years. Known across the country as a trusted advocate for trucking companies and their insurers, he retired in January 2025 after a career defined by preparation, credibility, and results.
The Quaker team recently sat down with Joe to catch up and he was kind enough to share some reflections with us — covering lessons for younger lawyers, the rise of nuclear verdicts, how focus groups and analytics are shaping defense strategies, and what both claims professionals and trial lawyers can do to avoid costly surprises. Below is our full Q&A with Joe.
Reputation
You earned a reputation as one of the country's premier transportation attorneys. Looking back, what was one of the most important lessons you learned that younger defense attorneys should take to heart?
This is a question which, I think, crystallizes the difference between when I started practicing (1980, don’t faint) and currently.
Old lawyers like to talk about how hard they worked, but that isn't my answer. We overdid it. Current generations know they must work hard, but still have a healthy life outside of work, which is a good thing.
The answer is: Learn your craft. That means knowing your practice area inside and out, to the point where you can explain it clearly to anyone. Study the rules that matter — regulatory, statutory, evidentiary — and concentrate on a few areas instead of trying to cover too much. Depth will serve you better than breadth.
Distinguish yourself. When clients want to know why they should use you, go beyond "I'm a good lawyer." In an age of saturation, the key is convincing clients and partners that you are different and eager to learn and grow in the profession.
Industry Shifts
Given the sharp rise in nuclear verdicts and jury unpredictability, what do you believe defense counsel and claims teams must do differently today than 10 years ago? Also, please feel free to share any of the reasons you think excessively high verdicts against commercial auto companies are on the rise.
I'm not sure there’s an easy answer here. The rise of nuclear verdicts is perplexing. Emotions drive these cases, along with the preparation, boldness, and resources of plaintiff lawyers. I even heard of a lawyer investing $3.5 million into preparing for one of these trials.
My best advice is to take a hard, honest look at the claim, the facts, and, most importantly, the insured. As they say in recovery programs, you need to make a searching and fearless inventory. I often put it this way: ‘Leave your guns at the door.’ Don’t come in with blinders on. Instead, try to see the case the way a jury might, especially after hearing it through the lens of opposing counsel and their experts. Only then can you build a strategy that addresses weaknesses, emphasizes strengths, and persuades a jury.
Video 1 | Nuclear Verdicts | Excerpt from Quaker’s interview with Joe Pappalardo, Transportation Attorney
As for commercial auto, the challenge is clear. People are afraid of trucks and, increasingly, of truck drivers. With headlines about drivers who shouldn’t be on the road, carriers accused of poor vetting or training, and the constant drumbeat of direct negligence claims, it’s no surprise jurors arrive with concerns. That fear is real, and plaintiffs’ lawyers know how to exploit it. Our job is to point out when those fears are being manipulated and to remind jurors that trucks are essential to everyday life — nothing reaches stores or homes without them.
Video 2 | Nuclear Verdicts | Excerpt from Quaker’s interview with Joe Pappalardo, Transportation Attorney
Focus Groups / Mock Juries
You've seen how plaintiffs' attorneys use focus groups aggressively. Have you yourself used focus groups/mock juries and how can defense teams better leverage tools like focus groups and analytics to improve case outcomes?
Focus groups and mock trials are excellent ways to test issues, theories, and to see how jurors might view a case. I’ve always believed the case should be presented the way it’s likely to unfold at trial. That means the person playing the plaintiff must take the gloves off and argue as if they were truly plaintiff’s counsel — and defense counsel needs to anticipate that.
Video 3 | Focus Groups | Excerpt from Quaker’s interview with Joe Pappalardo, Transportation Attorney
The results are not answers, but tools for reflection. Jurors show you what resonates and what falls flat. We have to be willing to adjust if something we thought was strong turns out to matter less than expected.
Video 4 | Focus Groups | Excerpt from Quaker’s interview with Joe Pappalardo, Transportation Attorney
As for predictive analytics, information is power. If the data are entered objectively and thoroughly, analytics can provide a useful sense of case value. But numbers alone aren’t enough — they need to be weighed alongside the experience and judgment of claims professionals and defense counsel.
Analytics
As predictive analytics become more common in claims, how do you see them changing the way defense counsel and insurers prepare for trial? Please feel free to draw from your experience with clients using analytics in the past.
Analytics will never replace the judgment of experienced lawyers and claims professionals, but they can sharpen it. If the data are entered fairly and thoroughly, analytics can provide a clearer picture of how similar cases have been valued and resolved. That information can help guide reserve decisions, settlement discussions, and even trial strategy.
In my experience, the best use of analytics is as a reference point, not a final answer. Numbers can point you in a direction, but it still takes people who know the business, the law, and the jury pool to weigh the full picture. When combined with preparation and sound judgment, analytics can help defense teams make decisions with more confidence.
Advice
If you could give one piece of advice to both young defense lawyers and claims managers about how to avoid costly surprises in litigation, what would it be?
None of this is new, but in this era of tight budgets it bears repeating: Preparation, gathering of all possible information, communication. Especially preparation of the defendants: company witnesses, and driver. Use your experts to prepare for deposing plaintiff's experts.
Joe’s insights remind us that even though the challenges facing trucking and commercial auto defense have grown, the fundamentals still matter most: preparation, credibility, and foresight. His answers highlight the value of looking at a case honestly, seeing it through the eyes of a jury, and adjusting strategies when the evidence demands it.
We believe the same mindset applies to how claims teams and defense counsel prepare today. Tools like Quaker Focus™ make it possible to test strategies, gather jury insights, and analyze data before trial — helping decision-makers reduce uncertainty and approach litigation with greater confidence.
Our thanks to Joe for sharing his time and wisdom with us! For those defending commercial auto cases today, we hope you recognize that his reflections are a timely reminder of why preparation pays off — and why new tools are making it possible to approach trial strategy with clearer insight than ever before.