Chain car accidents.. who holds liability?

[yhelothar]

Say if one person gets into an accident, which causes her to stop immediately. This causes the car in the back to not be able to stop fast enough, and he in turn, rear ends the first person, which causes the second guy to stop immediately. This causes the third car in the back to hit also.
Who would hold liability for everything?

Second question. This situation is the same as the first, except the second car was able to stop quickly enough to not hit the first. But the sudden brakage caused the third person in the back to rear end. Who would hold liaibility?

Please only respond if you know. Don't guess.

 

[orakle]

You are responsible for not hitting sh!t that is in front of you.

 

[Splork]

It depends on the state you're in

 

[mugs]

In the second case, the third person would be responsible for hitting the second person. You have to be able to stop even if the person in front of you stops quicker than normal.

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: Splork
It depends on the state you're in

california

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: mugs
In the second case, the third person would be responsible for hitting the second person. You have to be able to stop even if the person in front of you stops quicker than normal.

So say someone was tailgating you.. and you brake really hard causing them to rear end you.. They would have to pay for the damages?
If so, you could easily get rich driving a beater and pulling that sh!t.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: mugs
In the second case, the third person would be responsible for hitting the second person. You have to be able to stop even if the person in front of you stops quicker than normal.

So say someone was tailgating you.. and you brake really hard causing them to rear end you.. They would have to pay for the damages?
If so, you could easily get rich driving a beater and pulling that sh!t.

I'm not sure how the cops/insurance companies would feel about you braking for no reason... but the other driver would have no way to prove you braked for no reason.

In almost all cases, someone who hits someone from behind or someone who is in an accident while making an unprotected left turn is at fault.

I don't think you'll get rich doing that though, unless you file bogus lawsuits.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: mugs
In the second case, the third person would be responsible for hitting the second person. You have to be able to stop even if the person in front of you stops quicker than normal.

Sort of right....the 2nd person would be responsible for hitting the 1st person, the 3rd person responbible for hitting the 2nd person, etc...if you can't stop to avoid the accident, you are following too closely. THAT came from a CHP officer a few years ago, when I was pulling a gear trailer behind a crane, and the hitch broke off, scattering rigging equipment in the roadway. The first person stopped to avoid hitting the large steel chokers, and got rear-ended, causing a multiple car chain reaction...Each person was cited for following too closely, except the first driver, who stopped...My company was responsible for the damage the trailer caused when it hit a parked car and light pole, none of the rest...(yeah, I wasn't very popular at work for that, but I DID tell them that the trailer was overloaded IMO...It ended up being more a joke with the crews than anything else, and I wasn't in trouble, just hazed for it...

 

[essasin]

I was recently in a chain car accident

car 1(gets into an accident)----car 2--- car 3 --- car 4

If car 1 got into an accident and caused everyone else to train wreck.
-everyone is liable for the car they hit in front of them becaue they where driving too close or too fast for them to react in time


If car 2 breaks in time then car 3 is liable and car 2 holds no liablity IF you can prove car 2 did not hit car 1. Car 2 would need pictures of no front end dmg and it would help if you get statement from car 1 saying that car 2 did not hit car 1.