So I finally know how much I am getting sued for.... help me gather 'evidence' to refute her claim.

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

olds

Elite Member
Mar 3, 2000
50,071
744
126
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Sounds like you were over driving for the conditions and you will be at fault.

Well I dont know the exact speed I was going through the intersection but I usually go 15-20 mph through that. I know I had slowed down (no idea what speed) because I could not see.
Because you could not see, you were over driving for the conditions.

How are you to tell me that I was over driving for the conditions when I regularly go 5-10 mph below the speed limit when the conditions are perfect. I know I was going slower, i just dont know the exact speed cause my eyes were on the road.

So in your mind going 10mph is over driving? What if I was doing 10mph. I dont know cause I did not look at my speedo. But I could have very well been doing that.

Might I remind you that there was a car in front of me that went through the intersection right before I did. I saw his tail lights as he went through the bump (braked) so i know he was in front. Otherwise I wouldnt have been able to see him either.

You couldn't fucking see. You think it's OK to drive when you can't see?
I guess if the speed limit is 65 and there is 80' of snow on the road it's OK to go 65?

He would have slowed down to 55 and it would have been okay.

With 80 feet of snow I doubt that he would have been able to get out of the house let alone find the car and drive it ...
No shit. I used 80' for emphasis.

 

PlasmaBomb

Lifer
Nov 19, 2004
11,636
2
81
Originally posted by: MrChad
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Pikture of accident site...

Photo

Woman crossing from left (its under that glare) to right of street. No crossing, no stop lines in the direction the OP was going.

Actually, according to the OP, the woman was crossing from S to N, i.e. from the right side to the left.

Sorry Fixed :)

No shit. I used 80' for emphasis.

You are over emphasizing, you should have pulled over and waited till the snow melted... ;)
 

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
20,894
3,246
126
Originally posted by: NaOH
dang too bad motionman isn't helping you now:...

ummm.. no offense to motionman. I dont know how good he is.

But there isnt any shortages of lawyers in LA.

If anything too bad motionman didnt get the case. IF he had ideas, it would of been an easy case and a fast pay for him.

So no. Its never too bad this lawyer wont represent you.

Theres always another lawyer waiting in line to be on your counsel.

I have 3 i can call on at any time 24/7 and also that will wait on me hand and feet.


There really is too many lawyers in so. cali. So there isnt any possiblity of a shortage.
 

Jessica69

Senior member
Mar 11, 2008
501
0
0
Well, from what I've been able to follow in all this:

Peds in CA have the right of way at interstections.....and all intersections have an understood crosswalk....so there doesn't have to be a painted one there.

She was in the crosswalk.....why?

Maybe she thought the OP was slowing down for her to cross which is essentially what the OP stated in the first post.....

The intersection has 2 dips for surface water drainage. One has to slow down to go past that (my 2000 ford focus has soft suspension due to the age/miles).

So, the OP was slowing down and quite possibly giving the impression he'd seen the ped and was implying that he was indeed yielding right of way, as he should have done anyway, to the ped.

So, OP will lose and the ped will win.....how much depends upon how badly the OP pisses off the judge or jury......trials can either be by jury or by judge, up to the prosecution to decide, by his science defense, which may indeed piss off a judge just enough to slam him.

A long, drawn out science argument, though, will probably bore a jury to tears and just go in one ear and out the other....esp. after hearing the salient facts of the case....OP didn't see ped in crosswalk and hit her along with almost hitting her child.

 

sourceninja

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2005
8,805
65
91
I had a friend who hit a very old lady on a highway. It was 3am with no street lights and woods on both sides of the road. He was driving the speed limit (65mph) in the right lane. She stepped in front of his car and was killed instantly. The police took him into custody to test him for drugs. After he was cleared it was discovered that she wandered away from a home where she was being kept. The lady was unable to care for herself (I do not remember the actual medical condition). Apparently she wandered off and made it though the woods and to this highway. He was cleared by the police and on chargers were to be filed.

The family sued him and got a payoff from his insurance company. Stupidest thing I had ever heard.
 

jmanny

Member
Apr 12, 2007
116
0
76
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
I dont deny not hitting her. I admit I hit her, since there is a police report and all. That one I cannot fight. I dont deny the pain she would have on her leg, since I know what that feels like.

For the one who said I was not paying attention. First off you werent. Cause if you noticed, i was going 15-20 mph, probably slower but I dont know how fast since I wasnt looking at the speedo. I know I go through those intersections regularly at 15-20 mph. I know I had slowed down cause I could not see. I was following the tail lights of the car in front of me prior to entering the intersection. I could not see anything on the sides due to the glare!

In principle, she probably did not have insurance and stuff. Her medical bills have come to < 6K. I was notified that I was going to get sued in december, I guess she finally found an attorney to take her case. My insurance company thinks that even though they asked formally for 15K, basically if it goes to court its going to go double or triple that, and they will only cover until what my liability was. So effectively I need to get an attorney to prevent that from happening. Hence some background work.

Won't the Insurance Company Attorney represent you over and above the liability amount?
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: jmanny
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
I dont deny not hitting her. I admit I hit her, since there is a police report and all. That one I cannot fight. I dont deny the pain she would have on her leg, since I know what that feels like.

For the one who said I was not paying attention. First off you werent. Cause if you noticed, i was going 15-20 mph, probably slower but I dont know how fast since I wasnt looking at the speedo. I know I go through those intersections regularly at 15-20 mph. I know I had slowed down cause I could not see. I was following the tail lights of the car in front of me prior to entering the intersection. I could not see anything on the sides due to the glare!

In principle, she probably did not have insurance and stuff. Her medical bills have come to < 6K. I was notified that I was going to get sued in december, I guess she finally found an attorney to take her case. My insurance company thinks that even though they asked formally for 15K, basically if it goes to court its going to go double or triple that, and they will only cover until what my liability was. So effectively I need to get an attorney to prevent that from happening. Hence some background work.

Won't the Insurance Company Attorney represent you over and above the liability amount?

The insurance company's counsel will not. However; it shouldn't go to court if they offered the $15k and that's what the person wanted. If they want $15k the insurance company should settle it. It will be much more than that going to court just due to the fact that you are probably looking at $10k in legal/court fees just at day 1.

IMHO your insurance company is trying to get out of settling. Once they can take it to court and have the person ask for more than $15k, they are off the hook. They can't settle and sue you individually. However, they can decline insurance and elect to go after you. The insurance company will more than likely just ask 'to settle' at the opening statement. Once they see it's more than $15k they will offer to go to the limit of the policy.

At this point the other person is already assed out and will more than likely reject the offer. End of the first case. Next you will be called to court with the meter still running.

I'd sit down with your insurance company and have them draft a formal settlement letter for the $15k if that's what it takes.

Who is the company?
 

crystal

Platinum Member
Nov 5, 1999
2,424
0
0
Originally posted by: jjanders
I'm not going to speak to what you should do, but I can't believe multiple people in this thread are saying you shouldn't have been driving or should have pulled over.

Are you serious?? So you're telling me if it's sunny out, you pull off to the side of the road until the sun goes down? Let's be serious, no one here would do that. I've been in lots of situations where it was sunny and there was bad glare and I didn't have 100% visibility, I have never pulled over and waited until the sun went away, and have never head of anyone else doing it either. Obviously this IS a bit unsafe, and maybe people should pull over, but NO ONE does, so I can't believe people are being patronizing about it.

Oh don't worry about most of them. They decide OP is at fault and will use any crappy arguments to prove OP is wrong fight this.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: crystal
Originally posted by: jjanders
I'm not going to speak to what you should do, but I can't believe multiple people in this thread are saying you shouldn't have been driving or should have pulled over.

Are you serious?? So you're telling me if it's sunny out, you pull off to the side of the road until the sun goes down? Let's be serious, no one here would do that. I've been in lots of situations where it was sunny and there was bad glare and I didn't have 100% visibility, I have never pulled over and waited until the sun went away, and have never head of anyone else doing it either. Obviously this IS a bit unsafe, and maybe people should pull over, but NO ONE does, so I can't believe people are being patronizing about it.

Oh don't worry about most of them. They decide OP is at fault and will use any crappy arguments to prove OP is wrong fight this.


actually i bet most here will either pull over or put on sunglasses.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: crystal
Originally posted by: jjanders
I'm not going to speak to what you should do, but I can't believe multiple people in this thread are saying you shouldn't have been driving or should have pulled over.

Are you serious?? So you're telling me if it's sunny out, you pull off to the side of the road until the sun goes down? Let's be serious, no one here would do that. I've been in lots of situations where it was sunny and there was bad glare and I didn't have 100% visibility, I have never pulled over and waited until the sun went away, and have never head of anyone else doing it either. Obviously this IS a bit unsafe, and maybe people should pull over, but NO ONE does, so I can't believe people are being patronizing about it.

Oh don't worry about most of them. They decide OP is at fault and will use any crappy arguments to prove OP is wrong fight this.

He was only going 15mph and he did not see them. We have all driven before without sunglasses when there is a nasty glare. Those of us who drive responsibly pay extra attention to the road during these situations in order to prevent exactly what the OP did.

Let's not kid ourselves here. The only reason this happened is because the OP was not paying as much attention to the road as he should have been and this time someone got hurt. Now it's time to pay the piper.
 
Oct 9, 1999
15,216
3
81
Well I would like to lessen the damage. I am not sure what my insurance co. is trying. I have "ESURANCE", the insurance co. had offered lower, they didnt accept and hence suing.

I am going for lunch.. see you soon.

 

FuzzyDunlop

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2008
3,260
12
81
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy

4. and finally because its hella fucking cool to beat someone into submission with scientific data. I know I am guilty for hitting her, that I admit, since I did hit her and that's a fact. I am just trying to show that I wouldtn have hit her if she hadnt walked into the intersection to begin with.

Say this and you or sure will win. Gar-un-teed.
 

Hooah

Junior Member
Oct 9, 2005
7
0
0
To the poster , are you indian? Judging by your name your either Indian or Mexican. Anyway, You know in America, if you hit a pedastrian or back into someone your automatically at fault.

I know in countries like India, Mexico you can run over hundred pedastrians without ever getting arrested, but in America, its different, you actually have to obey the Rules of the Road.

Anyway goodluck with your court case.


 

Old Hippie

Diamond Member
Oct 8, 2005
6,361
1
0
Originally posted by: aigomorla
Originally posted by: NaOH
dang too bad motionman isn't helping you now:...

ummm.. no offense to motionman. I dont know how good he is.

But there isnt any shortages of lawyers in LA.

I thought about that also, but I've read a lot of his replies and he seems solid in whatever he's talking about.

I also feel he'd want to do a good job simply because a few in this forum just might be interested in the conclusion. :roll:

How'd you like this crew looking over your shoulder? :laugh:

It'd be enough to make me turn the job down! :laugh:
 

1sikbITCH

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2001
4,194
574
126
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
If I dont do anything, i'll lose and she will win. If i do something, there is a chance she wont get all that she wants. If I lose with all this work, then its no different from loosing without a fight.

I am not a pushover, i am a fighter!

If you decide to fire the insurance company's lawyers (and it was allowed by the judge) and prosecute this case on your own, it seems to me that you could have to pay the entire judgment against you out of your own pocket and the insurance company would drop your insurance all together. Then good luck getting insurance elsewhere after they read that you ran down a pedestrian and then fired your insurance company's lawyers.

At whylaff - A personal injury lawyer sues people who are injured due to the negligence of others. They will not pick up his case. A defense attorney is what he would need, and his fee would likely have to be paid up front and will be a few thousand dollars, which negates any savings he might be counting on by firing his insurance company and trying this case on his own.

This is a case of booksmart and streetstupid.

 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
Originally posted by: TheGoodGuy
Well I would like to lessen the damage. I am not sure what my insurance co. is trying. I have "ESURANCE", the insurance co. had offered lower, they didnt accept and hence suing.

I am going for lunch.. see you soon.

You need to pressure your insurance company to settle with the plaintiff before it reaches the court.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: Hooah
To the poster , are you indian? Judging by your name your either Indian or Mexican. Anyway, You know in America, if you hit a pedastrian or back into someone your automatically at fault.

I know in countries like India, Mexico you can run over hundred pedastrians without ever getting arrested, but in America, its different, you actually have to obey the Rules of the Road.

Anyway goodluck with your court case.

WTF?
 

yuppiejr

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2002
1,317
0
0
Since we're talking about a civil trial here and not a criminal prosecution I think your scientific argument is going to backfire in front of a jury if you really think you are better off representing yourself... Juries are not picked for their above average cognitive abilities, they are picked based on how easy it appears one lawyer or the other can sway them either way (ie .. dumb). Fact is, you come across like an asshole in this post and the fact that you hit a woman holding her child in broad daylight without a hint of remorse doesn't make me think warm fuzzy when the jury decides how to structure the settlement award. If it was my wife and child and you treated hitting them with a car like a mental masturbation exercise in avoiding responsibility a civil suit would be the least of your worries.

As I see it you are proper-fucked if the insurance company decides not to pay the $15k and settle out of court... If they choose to roll the dice and take to trial their max exposure is still only $15k, if the judgment ends up going to the plaintiff (and honestly, why wouldn't it - hell if they find this thread you're really toast) being for $45k you are on the hook for at least $30k and probably all of the opposition's legal fees and expenses.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,123
12
81
Originally posted by: yuppiejr
...you are on the hook for at least $30k and probably all of the opposition's legal fees and expenses.

Why would he be on the hook for the plaintiff's attorney's fees?

MotionMan
 

rezinn

Platinum Member
Mar 30, 2004
2,418
0
0
If you are driving in a residential area and you can't see anything you should be going about 5mph, otherwise you hit people and have to pay them 30k. Live and learn.
 

olds

Elite Member
Mar 3, 2000
50,071
744
126
Wasn't it luvya or something like that here that hit a ped and was never heard from again?
 

panipoori

Senior member
Aug 18, 2005
460
0
0
This is going to be a tough one to get out of, not only is she a woman but had her kid with her. You could have been legally blind and would still had to fork over the cash,