• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Tort law need help?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

mikcal

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

California

I am trying to find out if I have a strong defense or not. OK so I'm being sued civilly regarding a motor vehicle accident for being negligent. In that, they allege my acts were negligent; that these acts were the legal (proximate) cause of their damages.
So in a nutshell here's what happened: the van I was driving, was hit by a bicyclist as I was making a left hand turn at a four way stop intersection. The police, with the help of an eyewitness, have found the cause of this accident to be that the bicyclist failed to comply with CVC 22450(a). (Not stopping at a stop sign.)
The thing I was not in compliance with was, that I was driving while my license was suspended. CVC 14602.1 (suspended for non-driving related issues.) The only other issue which may or may not be relevant is, that the van I was driving, was insured and owned by a friend of mine, and that I had borrowed it with out her knowledge.
 


ecmst12

Senior Member
Did her insurance deny coverage for your claim because you took the van without asking? If so, you will have to hire your own lawyer to defend you, but I don't think they have a very good case, since the cyclist violated traffic law and you did not. Driving without a license is stupid, but it didn't cause the accident. If the owner's insurance is covering the claim, they will provide for your defense.
 

las365

Senior Member
Where did the bicycle hit the van?

The facts that you were: 1) driving a stolen vehicle; and 2) driving with a suspended license, do not make you negligent if you were not. They do impact your credibility as a witness. They do make it more likely that a jury would hit you hard if they do find that you negligently caused injuries to the cyclist.
 

seniorjudge

Senior Member
Although since our poster was not in his lane of traffic, that would look bad for him.

(What the cops think about the accident is irrelevant.)
 

mikcal

Junior Member
more info

1. yes it seems that her insurance is not feeling they should cover this.

2.The bike hit the back of the right side of the van near the right rear tire.

3.Te cops are the one the made the police report. What they put in the police report seems to be relevant. And what they put in their report is what they think and what they think the witness told them, right. And in what way do you mean that I was not in my lane?
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Keep in mind that the police determination of fault is not binding on the civil court or the insurance companies.

Frankly, I don't think the bicyclist has any real grounds to sue on since he or she ran the stop sign. I suspect it's merely an attempt to extort a settlement out of you.

Though, your friend might choose to protect him or her self my making a police report for auto theft. Because, it would seem that the owner has two choices if a claim is made against them: (1) claim you stole the car, or, (2) claim they loaned it to you without knowing your license was suspended. In version 1, you get in trouble with the law ... in version 2, HE gets in trouble with the law AND may face liability as the owner of the car.

But, again, we fall back to the bicyclist who ran the stop sign. Had he obeyed the rules of the road, he would not have been hurt.

- Carl
 

mikcal

Junior Member
Thanks Carl

for your input on this.
And as you pointed out in example 1. I get in trouble with the law; well I'm already in trouble there, so it seemed and seems to me best to me to keep my friend out of any possible trouble, since she really didn't know I was using her van until I called her right after the accident. I did tell the police that I had used it without her knowledge; in fact this is the only reason that after impounding her van (my suspended license), then released it without a 30 held as they originally had intended. I also told this to her insurance. Do you still think she should file a stolen vehicle report to farther document this fact? Mind you the incident all happened 3 months ago.
 

las365

Senior Member
Okay, more "accident reconstruction" questions:

There was a four way stop at the intersection where the accident occured. Were you and the cyclist going in opposite directions before you made the left turn? Or was he on the street to your right? Where was the witness, and was he or she on foot, in a car, or on a bike, or what?
 

mikcal

Junior Member
Further Detail

Yes we were traveling in opposite directions, I had nearly completed my turn when she struck the rear portion of the right side of the van I was in. She, the bike rider, had just barely entered the intersection at the time of the impact.
The eyewitness was another bicyclist that was apparently 20 - 40 feet behind the girl that "didn't even slow down at the stop sign"
 

las365

Senior Member
Last questions and I will stop. Probably. ;)

Do you know the nature and extent of her injuries? Did she go to the hospital by ambulance from the accident scene?
Is the suit for property damage and injuries? Or just one or the other?
Is she suing you pro se or is she represented by an attorney?
Is the suit in small claims court or a higher court?
 

mikcal

Junior Member
more info

She is represented, she went to the hospital with a fractured rib and punctured lung. The suit is looking for 500,00 pain and suff, 500,000 emotional, 150,000 medical to date and future
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
Whether your friend's insurance will cover will depend on a whole bunch of things. Had you ever driven the van before? Did you have permission then? Do you believe if you had asked if you could drive it, she would have said ok? What did she say when you told her about the accident? How did you get the keys?

I don't think she can make a stolen vehicle report NOW, since she has the car back now. And for insurance purposes, it doesn't necessarily have to have been reported stolen in order to be considered non permissive use. The policies usually say something to the effect of, coverage is excluded for anyone driving the insured vehicle without the REASONABLE BELIEF that they are allowed to do so.

If they aren't covering you, you REALLY need to get your own lawyer. Their suit has no merit, they are just trying to take advantage of the fact that you probably don't have an insurance company to defend you. And you can't respond to that suit on your own.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top