Auto accidents, motorcycle collisions and car crash cases involve motor vehicle collisions which frequently result in severe injuries or even death. If you or a loved one are seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision, you should consult with an auto accident lawyer who specializes in auto, truck, bus and/or motorcycle accidents resulting in severe injuries caused by negligent vehicle operation
Major auto accident cases can arise from:
- Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs
- Driving Too Fast (CVC §22350)
- Failing to Pay Attention While Driving
- Failure to Yield Right of Way (CVC §21800, et seq.)
- Failure to Inspect for Vehicle Defects and/or Improper Vehicle Maintenance
- Intentional and Reckless Acts
- Illegal Turns (CVC §22107)
- Failure to Follow at a Safe Distance (CVC §21703)
- Failure to Properly Maintain and Use the Brakes (CVC §26450, et seq.)
A personal injury attorney can assist in proving that the driver who caused the accident was negligent, meaning that the attorney will try to show that the at-fault driver is legally responsible for having failed to follow required laws and safety procedures. Most victims of motor vehicle collisions have claims for compensation against others and against the responsible party’s insurance company. Their claims for severe injuries should be entitled to compensation for medical bills, lost earnings, wages and other income, pain and suffering, property damage and other related expenses.
It is important to note that insurance companies may try to take advantage of victims who do not
fully understand their rights. Insurance companies will likely contest claims or make minimal settlement offers. An experienced auto accident lawyer or motorcycle accident attorney can help victims recognize and protect their rights in dealing with the opposing insurance company.
Catastrophic Auto Collision Case Study ( click for details )( click to close )
As a sheriff’s deputy, David had become proficient at vehicle dynamics and handling skills and was respected within the department for his knowledge and abilities in the safe operation of a patrol vehicle. He had both taken advanced courses in vehicle operation and handling, as well as participating in training other sworn peace officers in the proper skills and handling techniques involved in driving.
On Memorial Day, a call came into the sheriff’s office reporting the crash of a small plane at the local airport; David volunteered to respond to the emergency call and immediately left the department in his patrol vehicle. On leaving the office he activated his black-and-white patrol car’s lights and siren – “Code 3″ – and headed out of town to the local airport. He passed by traffic through town that was heeding his emergency lights/siren, including a city police officer who testified that David acknowledged him as he passed and that he (David) was known to be an excellent driver – totally in control and well-trained in emergency vehicle operation.
Less than a mile from where he passed the city police officer, however, and after having accelerated to approximately 57 mph after having left the city limits, David approached a “T” intersection – still proceeding “Code 3″. He was driving on a curving two-lane highway that was uncontrolled by either stop sign or signal for his direction of travel, which formed the top of the “T” at this intersection; for traffic approaching the intersection from the bottom, or “leg”, of the “T” there was a stop sign.
Stopped at the stop sign was a pickup truck being driven by Jeffrey, an employee of the local utilities district. Jeffrey testified that he had stopped at the limit line for about 3 seconds and although it was a clear sunny Memorial Day morning (around 11 o’clock), he failed to see the approaching activated red lights of David’s patrol vehicle or to hear the blaring siren. Witnesses in line behind David were mixed in terms of whether they saw and/or heard the emergency vehicle that was approaching on the curving highway from Jeffrey’s left – some saw but didn’t hear, some heard but didn’t see, etc. Jeffrey did neither; he looked left, looked right, and began his movement into the intersection to begin his left turn. After pressing on the gas pedal he realized that David’s patrol vehicle was rapidly approaching and he made a panic stop – sticking his work truck’s front end into the intersection. David had to veer to his left to avoid hitting Jeffrey’s utility truck, and then had to veer even further to his left in order to avoid hitting an oncoming car head-on. Although David spared a collision with either of those vehicles, his patrol car veered off of the road and struck a tree – killing David.
After successfully proving that while David was driving faster than would be safe for other vehicles on that roadway, he was operating his patrol car reasonably under the emergency conditions which existed and thus it was the fault of the utility pickup truck for violating David’s right-of-way. The case for David’s family was settled for a significant amount after a failed mediation and just prior to the scheduled jury trial.
