red light means stop

[Bluegrass5]

ky. I had stopped at a red light and this guy came up behind me and rear-ended me he was on his cell phone and wasn't paying attention.I got leg and neck injuries.can a person sue another person for negligents?I think it should be against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving.but that is my opinion.

 

[mlk1978]

Call an attorney today!

 

[Meatcutter]

ky. I had stopped at a red light and this guy came up behind me and rear-ended me he was on his cell phone and wasn't paying attention.I got leg and neck injuries.can a person sue another person for negligents?I think it should be against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving.but that is my opinion.

In some states it is against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving. The key here is to file a claim against the at-fault driver for your injuries and damages.

Did the police report cite the other driver for talking on his cell phone while driving, are there any witnesses to him talking on his cell phone?

 

[ablessin]

In some states it is against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving. The key here is to file a claim against the at-fault driver for your injuries and damages.

Did the police report cite the other driver for talking on his cell phone while driving, are there any witnesses to him talking on his cell phone?

If the OP lives in a state where it is illegal to talk on the phone while driving - unless you're "hands free" - even if there are no witnesses ---the cell phone carrier could provide a record of phone usage that could prove if the driver of the other car was indeed on the phone.

So, OP - if you were also on your cell phone, I would not pursue - because that could come back on you - - if you were not -hey, good luck

 

[Zigner]

So, OP - if you were also on your cell phone, I would not pursue - because that could come back on you - - if you were not -hey, good luck

Whether it's legal or not wouldn't have any bearing on who's at fault. If the OP was STOPPED at a red light and rear-ended, it doesn't mean he can't use proof of the other party being on a cell phone to help prove negligence.

 

[Bluegrass5]

I live in Bowling Green,ky and it is not against the law to be on a cell phone here people live on their cell phones.I don't own a cell phone i do my calling at home.

 

[Ohiogal]

Whether it's legal or not wouldn't have any bearing on who's at fault. If the OP was STOPPED at a red light and rear-ended, it doesn't mean he can't use proof of the other party being on a cell phone to help prove negligence.

Actually it could because it would be proof of negligence per se. As well as comparative negligence proof.

 

[ENASNI]

Actually it could because it would be proof of negligence per se. As well as comparative negligence proof.

Ohio Gal ... it is "Negligents" they are after... but it was nice of you to try.

 

[MandyD]

Actually it could because it would be proof of negligence per se. As well as comparative negligence proof.

This is all silly and moot since it's not against the law to use a cell phone in KY. However, what comparative negligence could there be when the OP was stopped at a red light?

 

[Bluegrass5]

This is all silly and moot since it's not against the law to use a cell phone in KY. However, what comparative negligence could there be when the OP was stopped at a red light?

for one thing the man was careless,you should have controll over your car at all times and pay attention.tell me what does moot means? or did you misspell a word.

 

[ablessin]

eventually that light is going to turn green.

Would they have hung up just because the lighted changed color?? Probably not.

What I was getting at, not that it matters since it apparently is not illegal in OP's state to talk while driving - was that you're always supposed to be in control of your car and paying attention - that includes when you're stopped at a red light. If the OP was on their phone, they were distracted and not paying attention to see they were about to get rear-ended.

 

[Zigner]

eventually that light is going to turn green.

Would they have hung up just because the lighted changed color?? Probably not.

What I was getting at, not that it matters since it apparently is not illegal in OP's state to talk while driving - was that you're always supposed to be in control of your car and paying attention - that includes when you're stopped at a red light. If the OP was on their phone, they were distracted and not paying attention to see they were about to get rear-ended.

Well, playing the "what-if" game is easy. What if they WOULD have hung up when the light changed. What if the OP was watching the cross traffic to make sure no-one was going to swerve and run in to him. What if the OP DID see he was going to be rear ended but decided the safest course of action was to brace for the inpact (as opposed to moving forward in to cross traffic)? In any case, the OP had full and complete control of his vehicle UNTIL he was hit. So, there is no negligence on the OP's part.

 

[MandyD]

for one thing the man was careless,you should have controll over your car at all times and pay attention.tell me what does moot means? or did you misspell a word.

I was addressing Ohiogal's response. I was asking her how you could have been negligent in any way for being stopped at a red light. Clearly you weren't.

If you want to know what moot means, look it up. It's spelled correctly.

 

[Bluegrass5]

eventually that light is going to turn green.

Would they have hung up just because the lighted changed color?? Probably not.

What I was getting at, not that it matters since it apparently is not illegal in OP's state to talk while driving - was that you're always supposed to be in control of your car and paying attention - that includes when you're stopped at a red light. If the OP was on their phone, they were distracted and not paying attention to see they were about to get rear-ended.

I DO NOT OWN A CELL PHONE. a person can not get out of the way at a red light.i was wrong about the word moot.sorry