Big mistake, how to proceed?

I was in a car accident a few years ago that is seared into my memory (partly because litigation has gone on for so many years).

The accident happened like this: I was driving on the innermost lane on the freeway (next to center divider) at 65 mph. Then I noticed a car beginning to switch into my lane from the second lane. The second lane, however, was moving at around 25-20 mph.

Time slowed down to a crawl for me. I started to push the brakes as I watched this man turn into my lane. The scenario at this time was such that half of his car was in my lane and half in his own. Had I proceeded going straight, despite my braking, I would have collided right into his driver side. I did not think about any litigation; I thought about crashing my volvo straight into the flimsy 90's model nissan and crushing a human being.

I turned (not sharply) into the center divider, bounced off, and hit his car while we were parallel. When we pulled over to exchange information, the guy had the nerve to try to have me sign a self-implicating statement.

Three years later, my lawyer's assistant calls me to discuss the accident before my scheduled deposition. I recounted my still-vivid recollection to her. Her response was that based on the pictures of my wrecked car, the accident happened "like this" (she proceeded to tell me "how the accident happened"). The implication was that if I wanted to win, I would have to change my statement; lie. I did so in the deposition and it was morally reprehensible.

A few weeks later, my lawyer was scheduled to meet with his lwayer and a court mediator. It turned out that his lawyer had other pictures of his car and it did not fit as well with the false story that I described in my deposition but fit his story better: that I was trying to turn into his lane and that was what caused the accident. My lawyer called the meeting off and told me that she now had to meet with her "specialist".

Today, I recieved a call from her assistant again who painted a very grim portrait of proceeding with the case and advising me to attempt to settle and that "he may not even agree to it.". She explained that his story fits the pictures better and that I was probably in shock and did not remember correctly.

I would like to know if there is any reason that my lawyer would rather not proceed with a case and attempt to settle. Does she not get payed if I lose the case?

Which is the best way to proceed from here? What are my options?

There is definately a recording of my real description of the accident, recorded by my insurance company a few weeks after the actual accident. Could this help me in any way?

Thank you so very much for any help or advice you can offer to me. I am young and know very little about auto accident law.

CatHat said:

The implication was that if I wanted to win, I would have to change my statement; lie.

Click to expand...

Okay, so you LIED under oath, right??

I would like to know if there is any reason that my lawyer would rather not proceed with a case and attempt to settle.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... couild it be because your attorney KNOWS you lied and can't allow you to further perjure yourself??

Does she not get payed if I lose the case?

Click to expand...

If the case is on a contingent fee basis, no.

Which is the best way to proceed from here?

Click to expand...

Your choice... admit to lying under oath and face possible legal charges, with your entire credibility shot.... or drop your claim entirely and admit fault.

What are my options?

Click to expand...

See above.

There is definately a recording of my real description of the accident, recorded by my insurance company a few weeks after the actual accident. Could this help me in any way?

Click to expand...

Not at this point. You are an admitted liar with NO credibility as to WHICH story is correct.

I am young and know very little about auto accident law.

Click to expand...

And without any morals or ethics. Your screwed.

I appreciate your help. I did lie under pressure from my legal council. She painted a very intricate model with little cars and a road to demonstrate what she believed (based on pictures of my wrecked car) happened. I imagined the scenario and began to doubt my own. The next day I was giving my deposition. It was only after a few weeks of playing everything over in my head that I realized what I had done.

If the reason you gave for why my attorney does not want to go further is true, then perhaps I need to speak to her about the interaction I had with her assistant. I doubt, however, that she was oblivious because she reminded me of all the details I should make a point of during my deposition, some of which I had never said nor implied.

Admit fault?

I guess I am old fashioned and prefer to do what I believe is right over what is most advantageous. I made a mistake. I am not denying my own fault in this matter. The sad thing is that that has been the choice that I have repeatedly had to make throughout this ordeal.

Saying that I am without morals or ethics is uncalled for. My principles and ethics are the most important aspect of my self and my life. If I only cared to do what is most advantageous to me I would not have spent all this time soliciting advice and telling the truth. You must understand, my opponent is the defendant in this affair.

Well, you should settle, if they agree to it, considering that you, as the AT FAULT party, is suing the not at fault party. Or admit to your guilt, and be prepared to be sued yourself.

Am I the at fault party based on my description of the accident or is it something else?

CatHat said:

Am I the at fault party based on my description of the accident or is it something else?

Click to expand...

Based on what you wrote.

I turned (not sharply) into the center divider, bounced off, and hit his car while we were parallel.

Click to expand...

At the time of collision (btween the cars) he was still in the process of trying to turn into my lane. Only half of his car was in my lane. I am still at fault despite his attempting to cut me off while driving 30 mph slower than me?

CatHat said:

At the time of collision (btween the cars) he was still in the process of trying to turn into my lane. Only half of his car was in my lane. I am still at fault despite his attempting to cut me off while driving 30 mph slower than me?

Click to expand...

Okay. What is the speed limit? How do you know that this vehicle was driving 20-25 MPH? Nowhere in your post did you state that you 1. used the BRAKES or 2. used the HORN!

I apologize. It was unclear. When I said "I started to push the brakes" I was trying to say two things at once. I did brake but did not use the horn. The speed limit was 65 but there was a dramatic discrepancy between the speed of my lane and the 4 outside lanes (including the lane of the man with whom the accident occured). He attempted to cut me off at the speed of his lane while my lane was going much faster than his own.

I keep at least the space of one car between myself and the car in front of me when I'm on the freeway (that time was no exception). I believe that he either did not look before trying to switch lanes or seriously misjudged the speed and his ability to accelerate from his speed to mine in the (relatively) little space between myself and the car in front of me.

I missed the brakes part. I apologize. I guess I was focusing on the next paragraph, but still I did miss it. Generally, an accident is considered the fault of that party that rear ends the other party. And, 1 car length going 65 MPH is NOT safe. Not at all. Not even close. If the car in front of you (by one car length) slams on the brakes, you will not be able to avoid an accident. Period. So, that doesn't help you. The other party MAY bear some responsibility for cutting you off (I didn't realize/couldn't tell) since at the time of the impact that they were still in your lane. However, I don't see where the other party was 100 at fault, and you were 0%.

I believe what you are saying and believe that it is very likely that your knowledge of these situations vastly exceeds my own but it doesn't make sense to me. It seems clear that I was following all laws before the accident. What was the legally correct way of acting?

I had enough time to consider the consequences of plowing into his driver side and worried that if I continued going straight, despite braking, that I would seriously injure the driver or worse.

A car-space is the minimum (I am this close only in heavy traffic--I live in Los Angeles). Before the accident I was closer to 2 or 2.5 car spaces at the least. I had enough time to brake to a speed of around 40mph.

By the way, I appreciate that you've taken this time to help me.

In most accident situations, you have to make split second decisions. Only you, the insurance adjusters, and the lawyers will be able to determine how much fault to assign. The police report, if any, will be taken into consideration. I've only given responses based on what I've read. A percentage of fault will be determined, and you've admitted to lying. I don't know what to say, except good luck.

Thank you for you help.

Stem Cells

Hi have a look at this web site http://www.stem-cell-clinic.co.uk/