El Paso Jury Awards $104 Million After MVT Driver Falls Asleep, Kills Worker in Sleeper Berth

In the early morning hours of October 28, 2020, Orlando Robles, a 38-year-old El Paso man, was asleep in the sleeper berth of a commercial truck on Interstate 40 in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma. Another Mesilla Valley Transportation (MVT) driver, Juan Garcia, was behind the wheel of a second rig carrying Robles. Garcia had been scrolling his phone through the night rather than sleeping. He fell asleep at the wheel, drifted off the road, and plowed into a disabled big rig stopped on the shoulder with its emergency lights on. The impact destroyed the sleeper compartment. Robles did not survive.

Robles left behind a wife, his mother, five daughters, and a young son who was seven years old at the time of the crash. His family waited nearly six years for the case to reach a jury.

Tawney, Acosta and Chaparro P.C. represented Robles's son. At trial, the firm and co-counsel attacked MVT's safety culture head-on. The company's own safety officer acknowledged at trial that MVT policy required drivers to rest, but did not specifically require them to sleep. That gap meant Garcia could legally spend his mandated off-duty hours on his phone, then climb into a cab and operate a loaded 18-wheeler with no meaningful fatigue safeguard in place.

Evidence showed Garcia had been using his cellphone throughout the night before the crash. The trial, which began June 30, 2026, placed that conduct squarely within a company framework that allowed it. Jurors heard that MVT's own internal policy was silent on the distinction between resting and sleeping before a shift.

On July 8, 2026, the El Paso jury returned a verdict totaling $104 million across all plaintiffs. The son, represented by Tawney, Acosta and Chaparro, received $27.5 million, including $20 million in compensatory damages and $7.5 million in punitive damages. The remaining $76.5 million went to Robles's wife, mother, and five daughters, who were represented separately. MVT stated after the verdict that it was 'evaluating our appellate options.'