Liability question about accident

They were trying to pull to the right or to the left?

Isn't your being a witness kind of a conflict of interest if your employer is representing her? Or is this a friend of yours and you were in the car and that's why she hired your firm (in which case you can't be a witness anyway)?

So she was pulling to the right from the right lane, and someone in the left lane merged into her lane and hit her on the left side. Sounds like it's clearly the other guy's fault, but the ticket obviously hurts her. But even if she was out of gas and stopped on the road, he had a duty to not merge into her. Especially if she was going slowly it wouldn't have been hard to avoid her. Ultimately I think it will have to go to a judge though.

first, if it hasn't already been argued, they should have argued the ticket but in reality, it sounds like the ticket was justified. You will have to explain why they were driving slowly since, in most states, driving too slowly is a ticketable offense and apparently is so in Georgia as well. Having hazard flashers on does not change the requirement to not impede traffic.

since you state this was on a blind corner, your clients actions (impeding traffic) was the proximate cause of the accident but the other party would be contributory to the accident and should have been cited with "failure to stop within an assured distance" or whatever Georgia calls their statute requiring a driver to be able to stop within their observed clear distance without hitting anything. I believe the "blindspot" you mentioned was considered to be a mitigating factor for driver #2 and as such, the officer and the insurance company saw your clients actions to be the cause of the accident and allowed driver #2 to skate due to the "blindspot" scenario.

Since those immediately involved obviously have a better view, or at least knowledge of the area, their decisions would more accurately reflect those factors. As such, I suggest the ticket and denial of claim would be appropriate. If they are not happy with the decision, there is always court.

I disagree since the merging vehicle has the duty to yield to any traffic already in the lane they are merging into.

ecmst12 said:

I disagree since the merging vehicle has the duty to yield to any traffic already in the lane they are merging into.

Click to expand...

that is why I specifically included the section about:

blind corner
local observers having a better understanding of the area
why was the folks even driving slow.


far be it from me to contest not only just the police who apparently saw the OP's friend as the cause of the accident but their insurance company as well.

I suggest the police statement reads a bit different than what the OP has presented if nothing else because of this:

the insurance company is denying the claim saying that they had ran out of gas and were in the middle of the road with no hazards on at all.

Click to expand...

hazards or no hazards does not relieve the OP's friend from being liable for obstructing the flow of traffic.

They wouldn't have obstructed anything if the other car had met its duty to merge safely.

by the fact alone they were apparently in the lane not moving at a legally required speed, they were impeding traffic. Obviously there was traffic on the road other than that one car evidenced by the fact that another car hit them and the OP was in a seperate car. That makes 3 cars, at least.

traffic and 1 vehicle moving too slowly = impeding traffic.

I think the only reason the insurance is denying the claim is because the officer screwed up his investigation and failed to properly document the unsafe lane change. The police report is of course not relevent in court, but the insurance company will use anything they can to deny liability and make the other party proceed to court. I think they have a better then even chance in court especially if OP will be accepted as an impartial witness.

Common sense would tell you not to merge into a right lane on a blind curve because there might be a car impeding traffic on the curve.

then the answer is very simple; OP's friend needs to contest the ticket in court and sue the guy that hit them. A court will make a binding decision. They are not bound by what their, or any insurance company determines.

And of course, getting the ticket dismissed will have no bearing on the liability issue either; neither insurance company needs to change their liability determination because of it. OP's client will have to proceed to court with his lawsuit for damages. THAT judge's decision will be binding on the insurance companies.