Dismissed Case

What is the name of your state?IL

In March, I was in an accident. I received a ticket for no insurance and failure to yield (the officer put me at fault, which I am not) when I went to court since the other party involved did not show up, I only paid the insurance ticket and the judge dismissed the other ticket. Since the ticket that put me at fault was dismissed does that mean that I do not have to pay for the other party's damages because they failed to show up. Also, when I received a letter from the other party's insurance in the total damages they included the deductible; I thought the insured pay's that. Since the other party did not show up I could not go to trial to prove that I was not guilty.I assume that he got a notice to let him know of the court date. The judge asked for the other party and when no one answered. He said case dismissed.

Please advice

vrodriguez said:

Since the ticket that put me at fault was dismissed does that mean that I do not have to pay for the other party's damages because they failed to show up.

Click to expand...

Not at all. Just because the ticket was dismissed based on the witness not showing up, that does not absolve you from liability in the accident. The other party didn't find you at fault, the officer who wrote the accident report did. The insurance companies base much of their decisions on that report, not on who was cited and whether or not they were found guilty.

Also, when I received a letter from the other party's insurance in the total damages they included the deductible; I thought the insured pay's that.

Click to expand...

No. If you were found liable, their insurance company is coming after you for the FULL amount. Why should the other driver have to pay a deductible in an accident that was YOUR fault?

which I am not

Click to expand...

The other party will have to file suit and there will be a civil trial to determine if you are liable. If you were not at fault then you need to file a claim for your damages including the deductible. Send it CRRR to the other driver with a copy to his insurance company.

You can also file a claim against him and then they will counterclaim. I had always rather be the plaintiff than the defendant so you might want to beat them to the punch and file first.

Curt581 said:

Why should the other driver have to pay a deductible in an accident that was YOUR fault?

Click to expand...

Curt,
You missed this part of what the guy said: "I received a ticket for no insurance and failure to yield (the officer put me at fault, which I am not) when I went to court since the other party involved did not show up, I only paid the insurance ticket and the judge dismissed the other ticket." In that, there is a legal question, and answering it with a question is no answer. If a guy is not found guilty of failure to yield, or a judge dismisses the case, "Fault" then leaves the picture. A no-fault mishap changes the nature of the insurance company obligation, wouldn't you say?

poppakeith said:

Curt,
You missed this part of what the guy said: "I received a ticket for no insurance and failure to yield (the officer put me at fault, which I am not) when I went to court since the other party involved did not show up, I only paid the insurance ticket and the judge dismissed the other ticket." In that, there is a legal question, and answering it with a question is no answer. If a guy is not found guilty of failure to yield, or a judge dismisses the case, "Fault" then leaves the picture. A no-fault mishap changes the nature of the insurance company obligation, wouldn't you say?

Click to expand...

Nope, I wouldn't say.

You missed the part where the were two different things going on here. Although they are part if the same incident, neither is dependant on the outcome of the other. The civil liability case, and the traffic citation case. He could be found not guilty of failure to yield, but still be held liable.

Conversely, he could be found guilty of failure to yield, but NOT liable in the accident if there was something the other driver did... like being intoxicated, or driving on a revoked DL.

I stand by my earlier statement. Having the citation dismissed for lack of prosecution does NOT absolve him of civil liability in the accident.

Curt581 said:

I stand by my earlier statement. Having the citation dismissed for lack of prosecution does NOT absolve him of civil liability in the accident.

Click to expand...

That part of what you said is absolutely correct. But, the conversation was not about absolution....was about specifics of an insurance company's obligation....whether or not one guy's company is liable for the deductable amount on another guy's policy, under the conditions described. They may have to try that matter, but without a convicted party, the testimony takes a different turn.

"Conversely, he could be found guilty of failure to yield, but NOT liable in the accident if there was something the other driver did... like being intoxicated, or driving on a revoked DL."

I was turning left and he passed the light on red. Also, the report information is wrong the officer put that I got hit on the passengers side but I got hit on the driver side (but that was not a surprise because the officer that handled the case never asked me what happened and never looked at my damages, the only time he approached me was when he handed me the tickets) I am not looking for the other party to pay for my damages But I don't believe I should pay for his damages. Since I don not believe I was at fault. There was a witness that was behind the other party and the witness said that the other driver slowed down when the light turned yellow and then speed up.
Another officer started to ask me what happened but interrupted me and started to talk to the witness but the officer that handled the report never spoke to the witness or me. No one else asked me to finish my side of the story.

Please advise.