Rita Monk v. Jason Chapman

Let’s be honest: nothing says “I’ve made it in life” like getting sued for $75,000 because you were texting, speeding, or just generally treating a public road like your personal demolition derby track. But when a FedEx driver and a guy named Jason Chapman turn a routine rush-hour commute into a three-vehicle cinematic disaster involving head-on collisions, statutory violations, and enough legal jargon to make a law student weep—well, that’s when we know we’re in for a courtroom showstopper. This isn’t just a fender bender. This is Oklahoma’s Most Wanted: Commute Edition.

Meet Rita Monk, your average Oklahoma City resident just trying to get from point A to point B without becoming a cautionary tale. On January 8, 2025, she was doing everything right—driving westbound on NW 10th Street, properly buckled in, minding her own business, probably humming along to whatever’s trending on the radio. Then, out of nowhere, chaos. Jason Chapman, allegedly speeding eastbound like he’s late to a meth cook, slams into the side of a FedEx truck that’s attempting a left turn onto a private road. But instead of stopping there—because where’s the fun in that?—Chapman’s vehicle gets launched across the center line like a rogue pinball and smacks head-on into Rita Monk’s car. We’re not exaggerating: this is a two-phase collision. First, FedEx gets T-boned. Then, Rita gets face-planted by a ricocheting sedan. If this were a video game, you’d get an achievement called “Total Road Wipe.”

Now, let’s talk about the cast of characters. Jason Chapman? Just a regular guy from Yukon, allegedly driving his own vehicle at “excessive speed” and failing to, you know, pay attention. Then there’s FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.—yes, that FedEx, the brown-uniformed, “your package is out for delivery” giants of parcel pandemonium. Except this time, it’s not a missed delivery they’re on the hook for—it’s a missed stop sign, a failed left turn, and allegedly not devoting “full time and attention” to driving. And don’t forget JRSN Capital Inc., the mysterious business entity that owned the FedEx driver’s vehicle. Are they a shell corporation? A secret LLC front for underground monster truck rallies? We don’t know. But they’re named in the lawsuit, so they’re clearly part of the plot twist no one saw coming.

So what exactly went down? According to Rita’s legal team, both drivers were essentially sleepwalking behind the wheel. Chapman was speeding—violating Oklahoma’s posted speed limit, which is a statutory no-no under 47 O.S. §11-801(B)(1)—and neither driver was paying full attention. The FedEx guy was trying to turn left across traffic without properly yielding. Chapman was barreling down the road like he’s in a Fast & Furious audition. The result? A textbook example of how not to share the road. The crash wasn’t just a bump. It was a full-on, airbags-deploying, “call your insurance company and pray” collision. Rita wasn’t just inconvenienced—she was injured. She needed medical treatment, racked up medical bills, suffered pain and suffering (both physical and emotional), lost quality of life, and probably still jumps every time she hears a siren. And let’s not forget her car—likely totaled or at least in need of a full-body resurrection.

Now, why are we in court? Because Rita wants someone—anyone—to take responsibility. Her lawsuit lays out two main claims: negligence and negligence per se. Let’s break that down for the non-lawyers (which, let’s be real, is all of us when we’re reading statutes). Negligence, in plain English, means: “You had a duty to drive safely. You didn’t. And now I’m hurt.” Simple enough. But the negligence per se claim? That’s the legal equivalent of pulling out the big guns. It means: “Not only were you careless, but you also broke the law while being careless.” Specifically, both drivers allegedly violated Oklahoma statutes—driving in a “careless and wanton manner” (that’s 47 O.S. §11-901(A)), failing to pay attention (§11-901(B)), and Chapman speeding (§11-801(B)(1)). When you break a traffic law and someone gets hurt because of it? That’s negligence per se. It’s like getting a DUI and then causing a crash—the law says, “You already failed the test. No need to debate it.”

And what does Rita want? A cool $75,000. Is that a lot? Well, let’s put it in perspective. If you’re suing over a dented bumper and a $500 medical bill, $75k would be overkill. But Rita isn’t asking for pocket change. She’s seeking compensation for ongoing medical treatment, emotional distress, lost wages (implied by “economic damages”), property damage, and the very real toll that trauma takes on your day-to-day life. In personal injury cases in Oklahoma, $75,000 is a serious but not outrageous ask—especially if there are lingering injuries, surgeries, or therapy involved. It’s not “I want a yacht” money. It’s “I want to not go bankrupt because two people couldn’t drive safely” money. And let’s not forget: she’s demanding a jury trial. That means she doesn’t want a judge quietly deciding her fate. She wants twelve of her peers to look these defendants in the eye and say, “Yeah, you messed up.”

So what’s our take? Honestly, the most absurd part isn’t the crash—it’s the sheer audacity of both drivers apparently operating vehicles while mentally checked out. One guy speeding like he’s late for a WWE match. The other trying to make a left turn across traffic like it’s no big deal. And FedEx—FedEx—involved? That’s like finding out Santa’s sleigh got rear-ended by a rogue drone. We’re not saying Rita’s lawsuit is over the top. We’re saying it’s understandable. When you’re the innocent bystander in a two-act vehicular tragedy, you deserve your day in court. And honestly? We’re rooting for her. Not because we hate FedEx (though we do have strong feelings about missed deliveries). Not because we think Jason Chapman should lose his license (though maybe he should). But because this case is a perfect storm of everyday recklessness meeting real human cost. It’s a reminder that a split-second of inattention can spiral into $75,000 worth of consequences.

So buckle up, Canadian County. This one’s going to court. And when the jury walks in, you can bet we’ll be listening—popcorn in hand, seatbelts fastened, and driving speeds strictly obeyed.