Beware of stephenk's advice

[countrygirl5464]

What is the name of your state? New York

In a previous post, stephenk gave me incorrect legal advice for my state, being New York. I feel if he did not know the laws of my state, he should not have been giving me legal adivce.
He stated that overtaking another vehicle through an intersection, even though it was marked a legal passing zone, was illegal. In the Vehicle and Traffic Laws of New York State publications, stated in Article 25, Section 1125, which gives the limitations on overtaking a vehicle in the left lane, it does not list intersections. It states limitations being only: approaching the crest of a grade, approaching upon a curve, crossing a railroad or within a 100 ft of a bridge, viaduct, tunnel or approaching vehicle. In Article 25, Section 1126, No Passing Zones, it states No Passing Zones are only when official markings are in place indicating those portions of any highway. Also, Article 25, Sections 1122 and 1124, are in regards to overtaking a vehicle on the left, and NO WHERE does it state that passing through an intersection is illegal. It clearly states that you have the right to overtake a vehicle on the left when the markings on the road indicate it.
Also, stephenk stated that when turning right from a stop sign, a driver only need be aware of traffic approaching in the right lane, not the left. According to Article 26, Section 1142 of the Vechicle and Traffic Laws of New York State, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop and yield the right of way to ANY vehicle which has entered highway or which is APPROACHING SO CLOSELY ON SAID HIGHWAY AS TO CONSTITUTE AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD during the time when such driver is moving across or within intersection. Nowhere does it state that you only have to be aware of vehicles approaching in certian lanes in certain directions.
In both situations, stephenk gave me incorrect legal advice for the State of New York.

 

[jimnyc]

I noticed you left out the portions that state:

Passing will interfere with oncoming traffic.

AND

You cannot safely return to the right lane before any approaching vehicle comes within 200 feet (60 m) of you

Stephen never said "when turning right from a stop sign, a driver only need be aware of traffic approaching in the right lane, not the left." He said it was not a reasonable expectation to have to look in the right lane for oncoming traffic in the wrong lane.

NYS law states clearly that you may pass in passing zones, as long is it is not a hazard. Passing through an intersection IS a hazard.

You "claim" your insurance company has already cleared your husband, why is it necessary to come back here and try to bash a well respected member of this forum?

 

[countrygirl5464]

I noticed that on 8/14/03, kalona681 posted a similar message:
Notice: Advice given here is by a lot of ppl with no law degree.
I guess I'm not the only one who got inaccurate "legal" advice here.

Oh, by the way, the other driver was not approaching from oncoming traffic. He approached from a side street and pulled out from a stop sign without looking. The driver who had the stop sign had to yield the right of way to traffic on the main road. Which he failed to do and that's why he was found at fault and not my husband.

Does anyone here know the law?

 

[jimnyc]

I noticed that on 8/14/03, kalona681 posted a similar message:
Notice: Advice given here is by a lot of ppl with no law degree.
I guess I'm not the only one who got inaccurate "legal" advice here.

Oh, by the way, the other driver was not approaching from oncoming traffic. He approached from a side street and pulled out from a stop sign without looking. The driver who had the stop sign had to yield the right of way to traffic on the main road. Which he failed to do and that's why he was found at fault and not my husband.

Does anyone here know the law?

Quite a few users complain about the advice they receive here, mostly those who don't like the FREE advice they've been given. People like to come here and give their "theories" as to why they believe they are innocent of any charges. When someone of vast experience gives them advice they don't agree with, they moan and groan.

You state the other driver "was not approaching from oncoming traffic". Didn't you say in your original post that this was a head on accident? If so, sure sounds like he was a part of oncoming traffice to me.

And lastly, why do you want to know if anyone knows Law here? Hasn't your husband already been cleared of fault?

 

[HomeGuru]

Writer, I have reviewed the threads you posted and you twist the story around. If you do not like the responses from stephenk, please leave and find another website. We do not want your kind on this website.

 

[knotcops]

1. You get what you pay for and you paid nothing!
2. Your husband was an idiot for passing through an intersection, legal or not!
3. You won so stop whining!
4. New York needs to change their passing laws!

 

[stephenk]

just because your own insurance company takes a position on liability, in this case in your favor, that position has no legal standing.

if the other party decides to sue your husband for injuries and property damage, your insurance company position is worthless. You cant argue in court that your insurance company believes you.

Your hubby cant pass cars without taking into consideration if it is safe to do so. Just because he can doesnt mean he should.

Your original post had the other car making a right turn onto to the highway while your husband was approaching in the wrong lane of travel while trying to pass a car, right? My position still holds that a reasonable person would not expect a car to be approaching them while driving in the wrong lane of travel. A right turning car after checking for pedestrians and bikes coming from the right would be concentrating on oncoming traffic from the left.

I did look up the NY Traffic laws and you conveniently left out important parts as part of your argument. Since you werent in the car, I am sure your hubby is also leaving out parts of the story that would make him liable.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Stephen, you're actually arguing with a New Yorker? You're actually justifying your position with a New Yorker?

Stephen, you didn't have to waste your time. Remember, they will do anything to win an argument, and will argue simply for the sake of arguing. They'll even eat their own young if they can win an argument by doing so.

Don't waste your time. We all know you were right, and fully appreciate your value to FreeAdvice.

IAAL

 

[JETX]

Countrygirl, I agree with you that the driver with the stop sign should have looked both ways before proceeding, but your boyfriend could have some liability based on Article 25, S1128:
"Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic the following rules in addition to all others consistent herewith shall apply:
(a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety."

Now you just have to go back and make sure that he didn't cross a double solid when he was passing (since the road should be double solid at an intersection).

 

[jimnyc]

My response:

Stephen, you're actually arguing with a New Yorker? You're actually justifying your position with a New Yorker?

Stephen, you didn't have to waste your time. Remember, they will do anything to win an argument, and will argue simply for the sake of arguing. They'll even eat their own young if they can win an argument by doing so.

Don't waste your time. We all know you were right, and fully appreciate your value to FreeAdvice.

IAAL

Hey! I'm a New Yorker, and I would never think of eating my child. Could it be because I was born and raised in NJ? I really need to move, these people are giving me a bad name

I agree with IAAL, I'm not much of a contributor here, but a daily reader. I as well think your advice has always been on target and you've been quite helpful to many, Stephen.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Hey! I'm a New Yorker, and I would never think of eating my child. Could it be because I was born and raised in NJ? I really need to move, these people are giving me a bad name

I agree with IAAL, I'm not much of a contributor here, but a daily reader. I as well think your advice has always been on target and you've been quite helpful to many, Stephen.

My response:

I often include New Jerseans in my above analogy. As far as I'm concerned, they are one-in-the-same.

I'm sorry if any offense is taken by you. You appear to be an "exception to the rule." That's rare - - believe me.

IAAL

 

[jimnyc]

My response:

I often include New Jerseans in my above analogy. As far as I'm concerned, they are one-in-the-same.

I'm sorry if any offense is taken by you. You appear to be an "exception to the rule." That's rare - - believe me.

IAAL

Nah, don't apologize, no offense taken at all. Not only do I find it hilarious, I *almost* agree with you! It's actually the entire Tri-State area as they call it here, NJ-NY-& CT.

[sarcasm]It's not THAT bad though, where else can you live that has the Yankees & Mets, Broadway, great eateries, hookers, murder, more drugs than Columbia, terror attacks & an entire region that doesn't pay it's electricity bill? (and lets not forget this very forums most educated posters)[/sarcasm]

 

[stephenk]

thanks all.

 

[tammy8]

I trust the advice here from the oldies like IAAL, stephenk, homeguru, Jetx, and many others than I do my own hometown attorney...which I pay WAY too much anyway!!!!!

You guys (and gals!) all rock!

I being the mafia aka insurance agent have just seen a claim get turned down because a lady was passing several cars in a "passing zone" when one car decided to turn left (without a turn signal). Highway patrol told me personally that no matter the lineage (Is that a word, cause I am sure IAAL will tell me ) the passing car holds all the liablity. I would be interested to see what happens when the other guy's insurance denies the claim and it goes to arributation (again sorry for the spelling, my glass of wine is catching up with me )!!!!!

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

I trust the advice here from the oldies like IAAL, stephenk, homeguru, Jetx, and many others than I do my own hometown attorney...which I pay WAY too much anyway!!!!!

You guys (and gals!) all rock!

I being the mafia aka insurance agent have just seen a claim get turned down because a lady was passing several cars in a "passing zone" when one car decided to turn left (without a turn signal). Highway patrol told me personally that no matter the lineage (Is that a word, cause I am sure IAAL will tell me ) the passing car holds all the liablity. I would be interested to see what happens when the other guy's insurance denies the claim and it goes to arributation (again sorry for the spelling, my glass of wine is catching up with me )!!!!!

My response:

Thank you. Please send all compliments to [email protected].

IAAL