So, here's the scenario. Car A was supposedly speeding (according to another injured victim) and lost control and spun on the freeway, hit the center divide, spun around back onto the freeway. Driver of car A abandoned car to avoid being hit, didn't have emergency lights on, regular lights on or anything. It was at night, coming around a blind corner on the freeway. 3 other cars apparently hit car A, the first two continued to drive on. Car B (the third car to hit Car A) stopped 1/4 mile ahead after collision and pulled over. Car C (last car to collide) was driving in lane 1, at speed limit, when collided with Car A which at that time, was positioned between lanes 1 & 2 perpendicular to oncoming traffic. Would Car A be at fault regardless, or only if CHP could determine he was speeding? Or would we be equally responsible?

If the driver of Car A left their vehicle in the middle of the freeway, then they're at fault, especially considering that they didn't leave any lights on at night. That's just stupidity.

It's not going to be a hard job determining that they were speeding; they lost control of their vehicle which means they were driving too fast for conditions.

On the other hand, it could be argued that Cars B & C should have been traveling slow enough to avoid the accident. But then it comes back to the fact that the driver of Car A left their car in the middle of two lanes.

Unfortunately, what is fair, sometimes isn't.

Here is a scenereo:

A box fell out of a truck in front of my mom's car and she hit it.
She is at fault for "Following too closely".

Why not the truck driver for "a non-secured load".

The rule seems to be, "If you hit something or someone, it's your fault"

I think there would be two separate issues here. Car A would be at fault for leaving the car in the middle of the freeway, not calling the police and not putting hazards on. Pretty much leaving the scene of an accident which is a big no no. Regardless of whether someone was speeding or not, how the heck would you avoid a vehicle in the middle of the freeway dead stopped with no lights on? Almost impossible considering most people aren't looking for cars stalled in the middle of the freeway. However the speeding motorist may get a ticket for speeding if that can be determined but would still have a leg to stand on as far going after the motorist who left his car in the middle of the road. I am assuming you were the speeding motorist simply because there would be no way for you to know if someone else was speeding? I think a speeding ticket is the least of your concerns at this point, at least your not the one who left the scene of an accident.

I am assuming you were the speeding motorist simply because there would be no way for you to know if someone else was speeding? I think a speeding ticket is the least of your concerns at this point, at least your not the one who left the scene of an accident.
No, I was the last car that hit. And appanrantly, according to a witness, the car was still spinning from Car B's impact when we hit. Is that still considered hitting a "non-moving object"?

KISS is right in this case. The car was stalled and had the drivers of the subsequent cars should have been driving at a pace that would allow them to stop in time.

Once my car stalled and I was rearended by a girl while sitting in the middle of the road. She was at fault because she was driving too fast to allow stopping room.

So, here's the scenario. Car A was supposedly speeding (according to another injured victim) and lost control and spun on the freeway, hit the center divide, spun around back onto the freeway. Driver of car A abandoned car to avoid being hit, didn't have emergency lights on, regular lights on or anything. It was at night, coming around a blind corner on the freeway. 3 other cars apparently hit car A, the first two continued to drive on. Car B (the third car to hit Car A) stopped 1/4 mile ahead after collision and pulled over. Car C (last car to collide) was driving in lane 1, at speed limit, when collided with Car A which at that time, was positioned between lanes 1 & 2 perpendicular to oncoming traffic. Would Car A be at fault regardless, or only if CHP could determine he was speeding? Or would we be equally responsible?


I'm a liability investigator and here is how I see this - "supposedly speeding" means nothing. Either the driver was ticketed or not. That ticket would be based on witness statements and probably would not hold up as far as liability is concerned. "Supposedly speeding" witnesses are discredited ALL the time. Cross examination of these witnesses if absolutely brutal.

However - no question Driver A is solely responsible for Driver A's accident.

Driver A also cannot be held responsible for saving himself for further injury so WHY no lights were on his (somewhat abandoned) car will matter. Were they damaged beyond turning them on? Also - it was a blind curve? Would lights have made a difference concerning cars B and C? I don't know what the speed limit was and that would influence stopping time and at what point B and C saw the car, their reaction time.

I see Driver A at fault but very possibly not totally - but is this a State with comparative negligence? What State?

There was a case where my friend was stopped along with about 2 other cars and a stopped car in front of him, so the scenerio was:

Car #1, Freind's car, Car #3, Car #4. Cars 1-3 was stopped. Car 4 was talking on her cell and rammed all the cars stopped at the light. My friend was being sued for hitting car #1 and so was car #3.

They will try anything.

There was a case where my friend was stopped along with about 2 other cars and a stopped car in front of him, so the scenerio was:

Car #1, Freind's car, Car #3, Car #4. Cars 1-3 was stopped. Car 4 ws talking on her cell and rammed all the cars stopped at the light. My friend was being sued for hitting car #1 and so was car #3.

They will try anything.

That's not "trying anything." Your friend and Car 3 ARE responsible because they stopped too close to the vehicle in front of them. Had they left adequate room, they wouldn't have struck the vehicle in front of them when they were rear-ended.

That is incorrect This, if cars 1-3 were stopped, then the 4th car is responsible for the damagebecause they were stopped.

Look at it this way- Say your car is parked in your driveway in front of your garage. I drive in behind you and tap your car causing it to in turn hit the garage door. Then I'm responsible for the damage to both your car and the garage door because your car was parked.

If the cars were in motion, then the last driver wouldn't necessarily be at fault for the other damages.

I'm a liability investigator and here is how I see this - "supposedly speeding" means nothing. Either the driver was ticketed or not. That ticket would be based on witness statements and probably would not hold up as far as liability is concerned. "Supposedly speeding" witnesses are discredited ALL the time. Cross examination of these witnesses if absolutely brutal.

However - no question Driver A is solely responsible for Driver A's accident.

Driver A also cannot be held responsible for saving himself for further injury so WHY no lights were on his (somewhat abandoned) car will matter. Were they damaged beyond turning them on? Also - it was a blind curve? Would lights have made a difference concerning cars B and C? I don't know what the speed limit was and that would influence stopping time and at what point B and C saw the car, their reaction time.

I see Driver A at fault but very possibly not totally - but is this a State with comparative negligence? What State?

The CHP had told the other victims (I never even spoke to CHP. I was sitting in the ambulance) that the kid was speeding when he lost control of his car. When driver A left his car, there was no damage to the front of the vehicle. It was a blind curve, however if there were headlights from car A we would have been able to see the light since the center divide was 4 feet tall. We would have been able to see that something was ahead. BUt the car was black, and even the EMT said they almost hit it when they arrived at the scene. The speed limit was 65, I was just entering the freeway from the onramp, had just gotten over to the fast lane. REaction time for both cars B&C was around 1 second. There was no way to avoid it. I live in California, which I believe has comparative negligence.

I am an insurance agent...
Kanicky:
If you are driving and hit something (a stopped car, a pothole, a house, a sheet of ice) then you are at fault. Regardless of whether it was day or night, the OP is at fault because you are expected to drive at a speed "reasonable and prudent" for the conditions. So in the case of it being night time, a driver shouldn't be driving so fast that they can not stop in time to avoid hitting an inanimate object.

So does that mean I should drive 30 miles an hour on the freeway at night because I'm being cautios of what lies ahead? I mean isn't there some sort of lee way about this?

So does that mean I should drive 30 miles an hour on the freeway at night because I'm being cautios of what lies ahead? I mean isn't there some sort of lee way about this?



There is in New York State - it's what a PRUDENT driver can EXPECT. As I said, is it prudent to assume a "dark" car will be perpendicular across an Expressway?

That is incorrect This, if cars 1-3 were stopped, then the 4th car is responsible for the damagebecause they were stopped.

Look at it this way- Say your car is parked in your driveway in front of your garage. I drive in behind you and tap your car causing it to in turn hit the garage door. Then I'm responsible for the damage to both your car and the garage door because your car was parked.

If the cars were in motion, then the last driver wouldn't necessarily be at fault for the other damages.

That's comparing apples to oranges. Why do you think they teach you in driver's ed that when you stop behind a vehicle, you should be able to see their rear tires touching the ground? Of course, nobody does that and that's why accidents like the one we're discussing happen.

I don't see a lot to sort out here - I question the condition/shape of the car and what the OP could/should have done.

Other than that I have all the info I need.

No, not in NYS - you are not "liable" for simply being on the road.

Not at all. There has to be NEGLIGENCE on someone's part.

Blurose,

Lets cut to the chase here. What are you concerned about? I assume you have filed an insurance claim. Have they denied the claim? Are they not paying your full expenses? Do you think a court case will be involved?

All of that has already been established; did you not see it in the first post?



You are wasting your breath - this has turned into an argument, not a legal discussion, and, no, I'm not sure ANYONE is reading the post.

Try reading past history - fascinating.

Of course, I am a liability investigator and I DO play one in real life but...

To Blurose,

Because your thread has gone off on a tangent, its beem oved to the Member Discussion area. Please repost your question and I will copy the responses to your post back to that thread.

As noted, since this is now in Member Discussions, we CAN discuss the issue of posting on technical versus non technical forums.

To kanicky,
Please let me know what administrator told you that. Because I will have a conversation with that person. Since I am one of 5-6 Moderators of this site, my word goes a long way here.

What I told you in another thread still holds. While there may be reason to post opinion in a technical forum, its frowned on. But this part is clear:

Responses to questions in technical forums, need to be technically correct, not just opinion. If that's not in the terms of use, it soon will be.

No one told her that. She made it up. I got a PM from an administrator stating that no "conversation" took place.

Well, unless you spoke to all the mods and experts, there may have been someone who said something. On the other hand, I can't imagine who would say such a thing.

To kanicky, if you prefer to PM me the name, I will discuss it with that person. But if you do not provide the name, I will have to assume you did fabricate it. And that would not go down well here.

Well, unless you spoke to all the mods and experts, there may have been someone who said something. On the other hand, I can't imagine who would say such a thing.

To kanicky, if you prefer to PM me the name, I will discuss it with that person. But if you do not provide the name, I will have to assume you did fabricate it. And that would not go down well here.

I assumed it was the admin. Who she spoke to because they referenced my request for her to PM me the conversation... which is non-existant.

I can speak on TN and GA law, since I not only investigated many accidents, am POST certified to investigate and wrote 100's of tickets because of accidents.

While the parked vechile may be ticketed for iilegally parked, or because of blocking the highway, the person at fault for the accident would be the moving vechile, since my law, they are required to not be moving at a speed faster than they can stop before hitting something in the road way. So yes, if your reflexes are so poor that you can not drive the speed limit and stop, then you perhaps should not be driving or drive slower. If you can not go the min speed on a highway and have the reflexes to stop, then you should not be on the highway.

So yes, if your reflexes are so poor that you can not drive the speed limit and stop, then you perhaps should not be driving or drive slower. If you can not go the min speed on a highway and have the reflexes to stop, then you should not be on the highway.


Right, so if 4 other cars also hit the same car all at least 10 ten seconds between each interval, than 100% of us drivers should not be qualified to be driving on the road? Wouldn't road conditions even be considered (a blind corner, no warning lights, no hazard signs, the driver didn't try warning oncoming cars, or never called chp to call it in?)? Whould I be able to argue that in court?

You can argue anything in court, you could find a judge who will not fillow the letter of the law. But yes, if each car hit the parked, and then wrecked car, each driver would be in violation.

Happens every day in multi car pile ups, I have written 4 tickets before, each car hit the car in front of it, they got following too closely,

The issue is that you were not able to keep your vechile under control, into the fact that you have a obligation to be able to stop if something was in the road, perhaps a teenager crossing ( even crossing illegally)

Many driving laws are by statue, in that there is no real reason allowed to break them unless that reason is written into the law.

U turns are one example, it is illegal to make a U turn unless it can be done safely, so as long as you don't have a wreck it is legal, if you have a wreck, then it was a illegal one.