I was driving down a non-residenial street here I Oklahoma City and hit a broken down car in the road. I didn't see the car in time because I was switching lanes as I was trying to pass the slower vehicle in front of me. The car I hit had no flashers on. Now the owner of the car is suing me for damages as well as "pain and suffering", even though I had insurance and their car and medical bills are fully covered. Can they do that?

You are liable for all damages to that car. You were the one driving and are responsible to look for things that shouldn't be there as well as those that should be. Particularly when changing lanes. In a nutshell you have responsibility to maintain control of the vehicle at all times. If you had you would have stopped before you hit them.



They can try and sue you for pain and suffering, but unless they were in the car at the time and suffered injuries... I doubt they would win for that.

Now if they were injured, because they were in it.. (not clear from your post).. then they might have a case... but they would have to convince a court their claims merited it.

... even though I had insurance and their car and medical bills are fully covered. Can they do that?

Your insurance company is paying an attorney to defend this case, right? Why don't you ask him or her if they can do that?

I was driving down a non-residenial street here I Oklahoma City and hit a broken down car in the road. I didn't see the car in time because I was switching lanes as I was trying to pass the slower vehicle in front of me. The car I hit had no flashers on. Now the owner of the car is suing me for damages as well as "pain and suffering", even though I had insurance and their car and medical bills are fully covered. Can they do that?


If your question is whether they can sue you for pain and suffering the answer is yes. I know that because they have.

Pain and suffering are totally different from "car" and medical bills.

Your insurance company will defend the claim. Oklahoma is a comparative negligence State. Their monetary award COULD be reduced by their percentage of fault.

If the accident was caused because you were changing lanes, didn't have your car under control, weren't properly vigilant, yes, it's 100% your fault. If the "no flashers" are found to be a partial cause - and if the car was broken down and flashers weren't working it's not their fault - their award will be reduced by their percentage of fault.

Then an argument would be made concerning how long the car sat there, disabled, and how many people were able to avoid it.

(I'm a liability investigator)