Car Accident Legal Question

[Gibson486]

It has nothing to do with resposibility. That is just how it works.....you sue the person who will give you a result.

No matter wha happens, though.....person B is screwed.

 

[Vinney]

For Car A to be liable its actions have to be the "but for" and "proximate cause." "But for Car A running into Car B, Car B wouldn't have hit Car C." That's probably true. Proximate cause is a little more complicated (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_cause), but in my opinion, Car A running into Car B is not the proximate cause of the accident between B and C since there was an intervening cause, namely that B negligently fled the scene. At worst, both A and B are liable, but A has a strong case that he is not liable for the injuries to C.

 

[D1gger]

Originally posted by: bctbct
Insurance is all about negotiation. A will settle with C because it costs more to fight. Really has no bearing, A gets a black mark if it pays for B or B and C.

FTW.

The lawyers for Car A Insurance Co. and Car C Insurance Co. will run up their billable time with endless legal filings, and finally settle on a number for Car A to pay Car B that is only somewhat less than the cost of fighting the case to the end. I've seen it several times in litigation. The lawyers win, the insurance companies win by jacking up the rate for both A and C (each end up paying for part of the claim), and the car owners get screwed.

 

[Schfifty Five]

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: bctbct
C probably contends that B was pushed into C after being hit by A. A loses.

Not possible since Car C was a few cars down from the original accident. They contend Car A scared Car B into fleeing into them.


Their logic is Car B never would have hit them if they didn't flee the scene of an accident, and Car B never would have had to flee the scene of an accident if Car A didn't hit Car B.

Which I think is just stupid logic.

I agree, that is stupid logic because we can keep on going and say Car B should never have been on the road in the first place due to underage/no license/insurance, etc so thus Car A would never have rear-ended him.

Car B = jail
Car C = money from own insurance but with no hike in premium
Car A = possible citation for negligent driving (or whatever theywere doing, maybe speeding?) and own insurance pay for damages with or without hikes in premium.