Defense to: Failure to use due care citation

[SarahCalTech]

I am posting from a friends account:

Citation: Failure to use due care
Ordinance #: 335.01
City: Morgantown, WV

Facts of the Case:

As was the case in Morgantown, WV as with most populated cities, rush hour traffic is a bit of a rat race. The time was 4:45 pm and I was on my way to another campus to be processed for my Work Study program as to help pay expenses etc. As this was the first rain in a considerable amount of weeks, the roads were slick with oil and water. I used a reasonable amount of caution to adjust to the weather conditions. The car in front of me came to an abrupt stop as is the case in most college towns with more than its share of inexperienced drivers. I braked and began to hydroplane. I pumped my breaks and could not recoup traction and instead of veering into oncoming traffic or a tree i hit the rear end of the vehicle in front of me. There was NO DAMAGE to the vehicle in front as I was traveling well below the speed limit but there was considerable damage to my vehicle, mainly due to the trajectory of my impact. Morgantown city ordinance mandates an issuance of a citation for any vehicular accident. In this case it was "Failure to use due care." I have pleaded not guilty and awaiting a court hearing.

Issue: As I was made aware some of these citations are dismissed. As this is my first accident and I have no points on my license what would be a reasonable defense, if any.

Thanks to all for any genuine help.

 

[FlyingRon]

most college towns with more than its share of inexperienced driver

Including ones who drive too fast for road conditions and slam into the back of other vehicles.

 

[SarahCalTech]

Including ones who drive too fast for road conditions and slam into the back of other vehicles.

Predictable response....although I was asking for genuine advice in an advice forum. It baffles me as to why you would even have the free time to post such a response, "senior member."

But I'm sure your an average lawyer at best. Moving on, we were on a slope and gravity played an important roll. You bore me.

Please answer the question. I'm sure you cannot so i'll humor your responses.

 

[seniorjudge]

Q: Issue: As I was made aware some of these citations are dismissed. As this is my first accident and I have no points on my license what would be a reasonable defense, if any.


A: There is no defense. Had you been using due care, you would not have had a wreck.

 

[Zigner]

I am posting from a friends account:

Citation: Failure to use due care
Ordinance #: 335.01
City: Morgantown, WV

Facts of the Case:

As was the case in Morgantown, WV as with most populated cities, rush hour traffic is a bit of a rat race. The time was 4:45 pm and I was on my way to another campus to be processed for my Work Study program as to help pay expenses etc. As this was the first rain in a considerable amount of weeks, the roads were slick with oil and water. I used a reasonable amount of caution to adjust to the weather conditions. The car in front of me came to an abrupt stop as is the case in most college towns with more than its share of inexperienced drivers. I braked and began to hydroplane. I pumped my breaks and could not recoup traction and instead of veering into oncoming traffic or a tree i hit the rear end of the vehicle in front of me. There was NO DAMAGE to the vehicle in front as I was traveling well below the speed limit but there was considerable damage to my vehicle, mainly due to the trajectory of my impact. Morgantown city ordinance mandates an issuance of a citation for any vehicular accident. In this case it was "Failure to use due care." I have pleaded not guilty and awaiting a court hearing.

Issue: As I was made aware some of these citations are dismissed. As this is my first accident and I have no points on my license what would be a reasonable defense, if any.

Thanks to all for any genuine help.

A reasonable defense would be that you WERE using due care (ie: care which would allow you to avoid an accident based on road conditions). Of course, you don't HAVE that defense available, based on the fact that you CAUSED AN ACCIDENT!

 

[seniorjudge]

A reasonable defense would be that you WERE using due care (ie: care which would allow you to avoid an accident based on road conditions). Of course, you don't HAVE that defense available, based on the fact that you CAUSED AN ACCIDENT!

You'd think someone going to CalTech would understand physics!

 

[Zigner]

You'd think someone going to CalTech would understand physics!

Well, he did say he was posting from a friend's account. Even so...a FRIEND of a CalTech student should be able to understand THIS

 

[SarahCalTech]

I do not go to caltech although I did graduate from Brown. Not sure if that makes a difference as physics is uniform.

Regardless, IF you understood physics, and i'm not to sure you do (no offense intended). Braking as well as acceleration can cause a vehicle to hydroplane. Although rate of speed can bea factor it is not the only factor. You can go 10 miles an hour in light rain and still hydroplane. When gravity is involved (a small hill), stability control may help recovery from a skid when the vehicle slows enough to regain traction, although it cannot prevent hydroplaning.

I assume being a lawyer you rely on the court room work group defense eh.

Lets see how this plays out. Any predictions. I'm sure your dying to showcase some arrogance....Those T3 law schools rely paid off eh. Eh oh. burning bridges.

 

[Indiana Filer]

I pumped my breaks

I've figured out why you failed to use due care. You should have used your BRAKES to stop, not your breaks.

You'd think someone smart enough to get into college would know the difference.

But then you also posted:

important roll

Tell us again about your great education.

In case you can't tell, we don't appreciate your snide comments to someone who gave you an accurate response.

You hit the person, therefore you failed to use due care.

 

[SarahCalTech]

I've figured out why you failed to use due care. You should have used your BRAKES to stop, not your breaks.

You'd think someone smart enough to get into college would know the difference.

In case you can't tell, we don't appreciate your snide comments to someone who gave you an accurate response.

You hit the person, therefore you failed to use due care.

(yawn) (yown?) (yoownn?)

You hit the person, therefore you failed to use due care.

Su lógica tiene hoyos.
Socrotes ne serait pas fier.

 

[ecmst12]

Not everyone here is a lawyer (in fact, lawyers are in the minority I think) so don't make assumptions.

You don't really have a valid defense against the ticket, since it was appropriate. Even going well below the speed limit was not slow enough for road conditions, or you would not have caused the accident. However, you could still get the ticket reduced or dismissed. You can always go to court and ask for a deal or see if the issuing officer doesn't show up. You'll still be liable for the accident, but might be able to get the points taken off your license.

 

[SarahCalTech]

Not everyone here is a lawyer (in fact, lawyers are in the minority I think) so don't make assumptions.

You don't really have a valid defense against the ticket, since it was appropriate. Even going well below the speed limit was not slow enough for road conditions, or you would not have caused the accident. However, you could still get the ticket reduced or dismissed. You can always go to court and ask for a deal or see if the issuing officer doesn't show up. You'll still be liable for the accident, but might be able to get the points taken off your license.

Thank you. Finally. I do appreciate the response.

 

[You Are Guilty]

I love these posts. Friend-of-OP, please be sure to report back on how your court date went.

As for defenses, I like to go with a variant of the "Cousin Vinny" strategy, in which you argue to the Court that the laws of physics cease to apply in your vehicle and that in spite of your using "due care", you nonetheless managed to hydroplane (i.e. lose traction) and rear end another vehicle (who, incidentally, somehow managed not to hydroplane on the exact same road).

Good luck.

 

[Texas Pooh]

OP won't be back.

They never come back.

They post, get a realistic answer that they don't like, or even many realistic answers, and respond by either insulting those with experience or explaining why the court/judge/prosecutor/mediator will magically treat them differently than the other 9,999 people in identical situations.

Then we never hear from them again. I'm personally waiting for any number of people to come back and tell us how things worked out.

By the way, SarahCalTech, I hope you don't think we really care about your pathetic snide comments ... we've seen better.

good luck with your physics lesson to the judge!

 

[SarahCalTech]

I love these posts. Friend-of-OP, please be sure to report back on how your court date went.

As for defenses, I like to go with a variant of the "Cousin Vinny" strategy, in which you argue to the Court that the laws of physics cease to apply in your vehicle and that in spite of your using "due care", you nonetheless managed to hydroplane (i.e. lose traction) and rear end another vehicle (who, incidentally, somehow managed not to hydroplane on the exact same road).

Good luck.

very good. I will let you know. Although the vehicle in front of me did hydroplane and did hit the vehicle in front of her.

Although if she didn't it isn't incident it is subjective as she was driving a truck with very narrow wheels making it harder for her to hydroplane since your using comparisons.