Will a jury always find you liable for a rear-end accident?
"While driving on a parkway in New York in 2005, a wild turkey hit Mary Reilly’s windshield. The impact shattered the windshield, so Reilly put her signal on and slowed down in preparation to pull off onto the left-hand shoulder. Alan Watson was driving behind her and noticed something moving in the median of the roadway. When he returned his gaze to the road, he noticed Reilly’s car was slowing down. He was unable to stop in time and rear-ended her vehicle. Reilly filed Reilly v. Watson, alleging liability on the part of Watson.
In most rear-end collisions, the motorist in the rear is found liable, except in cases of mechanical failure, sudden stopping of the vehicle ahead, skidding on wet pavement or another unavoidable, reasonable cause. The jury did not find Watson liable because he provided the court with a non-negligent explanation of the accident."
But remember, it usually doesn't go to a jury. You may not be "liable" but you'll probably still be considered "at fault" -- meaning your insurance will pay and your insurance will go up. And you don't have to be cited to be considered "at fault". And, even worse, most parking lot accidents will end up being considered "at fault" for both drivers since there is typically no police report!
So, be careful!
"While driving on a parkway in New York in 2005, a wild turkey hit Mary Reilly’s windshield. The impact shattered the windshield, so Reilly put her signal on and slowed down in preparation to pull off onto the left-hand shoulder. Alan Watson was driving behind her and noticed something moving in the median of the roadway. When he returned his gaze to the road, he noticed Reilly’s car was slowing down. He was unable to stop in time and rear-ended her vehicle. Reilly filed Reilly v. Watson, alleging liability on the part of Watson.
In most rear-end collisions, the motorist in the rear is found liable, except in cases of mechanical failure, sudden stopping of the vehicle ahead, skidding on wet pavement or another unavoidable, reasonable cause. The jury did not find Watson liable because he provided the court with a non-negligent explanation of the accident."
But remember, it usually doesn't go to a jury. You may not be "liable" but you'll probably still be considered "at fault" -- meaning your insurance will pay and your insurance will go up. And you don't have to be cited to be considered "at fault". And, even worse, most parking lot accidents will end up being considered "at fault" for both drivers since there is typically no police report!
So, be careful!
RSS Feed
