Legal repercussions of single vehicle accident? Updated question in post #14

Christabelle · Dec 2, 2014

What are the legal repercussions of the following situation?

Two 17-year-olds are involved in a one-vehicle accident. The car belongs to the passenger, who is too intoxicated to drive. It's a vintage fixer that he and his father have been working on and isn't equipped with airbags. The passenger isn't wearing a seatbelt and is killed on impact.

The driver survives the crash but has serious injuries due to seatbelt failure, impact with the steering column, etc. Any blood work or tox screen comes back clean for drugs and alcohol.

Road conditions are icy and poorly maintained. It's a hilly, rural road with crumbling shoulders. The car spins out on ice and rolls approximately four times.

Can any charges be files against the driver? Is so, what? Negligence? Failure to maintain control?

Would the family of either party have a legal case?

Maryn · Dec 2, 2014

I'm not a lawyer, but a family member was in a serious accident with a death of someone not wearing a seatbelt.

There could easily be a ticket for unreasonable speed for road conditions. This is a moving violation, so the driver would get a ticket and not have to appear in court unless he chooses to fight the ticket.

If the driver is ticketed, any wrongful death civil suit the family of the dead passenger files now has teeth. The payment of the ticket's fine proves the driver was in the wrong, so the insurer is going to urge the driver to go to court and fight the ticket, not just pay it. The insurance company may very well provide an attorney. (Ours did.)

If it comes to a civil trial for damages for wrongful death, the fact that the passenger was not buckled in will be a factor, but only a factor. His not being buckled did not cause his death. The accident did.

Your fictional situation suggests things could go whatever direction you need them to for the story. The driver was straight and sober, not taking crazy risks like passing on a hill, not speeding, doing a safety-related favor for the passenger too drunk to drive. The court is likely to look on it as an accident, pure and simple, and award damages equal to the amount of insurance. But if the driver's a "bad dude" with an attitude, has a criminal or drunk-driving record, is poor, non-white, uninsured, etc., the court could easily lean in the other direction.

Maryn, hoping this helps but thinking you need to talk to a lawyer

jclarkdawe · Dec 2, 2014

What does your story need? All sorts of possibilities here.

What state is this in?

Four 360 degree rolls and you've got a car going 60 mph or better, unless the car is going down a hill. Understand that icy conditions and fatal accidents are not the usual combination. Bad weather causes the accidents to be slower and with less force. It happens, but if you want a big accident, bad weather is not what you want.

Understand that a vintage car crashes markedly differently than a modern car. They don't have the collapse zones that modern cars do.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

cmhbob · Dec 2, 2014

In Ohio, it would have earned him citations for speed unsafe for conditions, and failure to control, and a possible vehicular manslaughter charge, if they can prove recklessness or negligence.

In almost any state, there would be a citation for failure to control, since if you crashed, you didn't maintain control.

The passenger's family might sue the driver's family. If that happened to me, I'd countersue the jurisdiction charged with maintaining the road.

Christabelle · Dec 3, 2014

Thanks for the responses. I try to address the questions and pose a few additional questions below.

jclarkdawe said:
What does your story need? All sorts of possibilities here.

What state is this in?

Four 360 degree rolls and you've got a car going 60 mph or better, unless the car is going down a hill. Understand that icy conditions and fatal accidents are not the usual combination. Bad weather causes the accidents to be slower and with less force. It happens, but if you want a big accident, bad weather is not what you want.

Understand that a vintage car crashes markedly differently than a modern car. They don't have the collapse zones that modern cars do.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

As always, you raise excellent questions, Jim.

Let's start with what I need:
There needs to be ice, but it could be just starting to freeze. This is mid-November in Georgia. If most of the roads are okay, and they happen to cross a bridge where ice has formed, could that account for speed? It's around midnight or 1 a.m. when the accident occurs. The driver could likely be speeding. I'd like for the car to roll at least twice. Four times isn't necessary. It just seemed appropriate for the terrain I imagined.

The shoulder of the road is poorly maintained, and there's a drop off that prevents the driver from regaining traction after he loses control. There's no specific location that I'm basing it on. It's a medium-sized town surrounded by rural land and approximately 2 hours from Atlanta. (The location is subject to being moved if I find somewhere else I like better.)

So for the wreck, it needs to be somewhat inconclusive. The driver might be speeding, but he's not going 100 MPH. His father is highly ranked in the local sheriff's department, and I'd like there to be some question about whether the kid really might have been intoxicated and if there was a cover up. Nothing that's going to bring the sheriff's department down, but rumors and talk that cast some doubt should a law suit be filed.

I went with a vintage car rather than a modern one because I figured the roof would collapse easier and without airbags, the driver would be more likely to meet the steering wheel with his chest.

The driver needs head, spine, and chest injuries severe enough to be touch and go for a week or more but that he'll ultimately survive. He can't remember the wreck and can have some residual memory issues but nothing that's going to impede him from having relatively normal cognitive function, returning to school with his class, etc. The spinal injury should result in several burst fractures of his cervical vertebrae and a C6-C7 spinal cord injury.

If I'm off base with this scenario, let me know while I'm straightening out everything.

cmhbob said:
In Ohio, it would have earned him citations for speed unsafe for conditions, and failure to control, and a possible vehicular manslaughter charge, if they can prove recklessness or negligence.

In almost any state, there would be a citation for failure to control, since if you crashed, you didn't maintain control.

The passenger's family might sue the driver's family. If that happened to me, I'd countersue the jurisdiction charged with maintaining the road.

If the driver is charged with failure to maintain control or unsafe speed, would the passenger's family be able to sue for vehicular manslaughter/wrongful death/something similar?

I don't want the driver's family to come across as heartless, but I'd like there to be some way to talk the victim's family out of their lawsuit or something where they aren't tied up in court for years. I need tension between the families, but I don't want my driver's family to be paying off the other family.

Maryn said:
I'm not a lawyer, but a family member was in a serious accident with a death of someone not wearing a seatbelt.

There could easily be a ticket for unreasonable speed for road conditions. This is a moving violation, so the driver would get a ticket and not have to appear in court unless he chooses to fight the ticket.

If the driver is ticketed, any wrongful death civil suit the family of the dead passenger files now has teeth. The payment of the ticket's fine proves the driver was in the wrong, so the insurer is going to urge the driver to go to court and fight the ticket, not just pay it. The insurance company may very well provide an attorney. (Ours did.)

If it comes to a civil trial for damages for wrongful death, the fact that the passenger was not buckled in will be a factor, but only a factor. His not being buckled did not cause his death. The accident did.

Your fictional situation suggests things could go whatever direction you need them to for the story. The driver was straight and sober, not taking crazy risks like passing on a hill, not speeding, doing a safety-related favor for the passenger too drunk to drive. The court is likely to look on it as an accident, pure and simple, and award damages equal to the amount of insurance. But if the driver's a "bad dude" with an attitude, has a criminal or drunk-driving record, is poor, non-white, uninsured, etc., the court could easily lean in the other direction.

Maryn, hoping this helps but thinking you need to talk to a lawyer

If a ruling in necessary, I'd like it to be found just an accident. How much would the driver's family have to pay or would it all fall to the insurance?

cmhbob · Dec 3, 2014

Christabelle said:
If the driver is charged with failure to maintain control or unsafe speed, would the passenger's family be able to sue for vehicular manslaughter/wrongful death/something similar?

I don't want the driver's family to come across as heartless, but I'd like there to be some way to talk the victim's family out of their lawsuit or something where they aren't tied up in court for years. I need tension between the families, but I don't want my driver's family to be paying off the other family.

The passenger's family can sue without a citation; anyone can pretty much sue anyone else for just about any reason. And I don't know about GA traffic laws, but in Ohio, the failure to control was almost an automatic for any crash, so I don't know how much weight that would carry in a civil suit, especially if they opted for a bench trial.

Maybe the driver's family says "Look, it was a terrible accident, but the reality of it is that he could have recovered if the county did a better job of fixing the road. We're suing the county over that. blah, blah, etc."

Maryn · Dec 3, 2014

If a ruling in necessary, I'd like it to be found just an accident. How much would the driver's family have to pay or would it all fall to the insurance?

The family of the girl who died sued for $20 million, hiring the law firm which represented OJ Simpson, and the trucker who could not avoid hitting her when she came out of the vehicle sued for $3 million. There were elements of race and class at trial and we suspect the family mistook us for wealthy and attempted to turn their tragedy into a windfall.

The trucker received nothing, and the girl's family received the amount of our insurance--and her mother was ordered to repay the disability she received for being unable to work from that money. I think it was $20,000. There was some race- and class-based name calling as we left the courthouse. A lovely time was had by all.

Maryn, lying

jclarkdawe · Dec 3, 2014

Okay, let's set up the accident. Two lane road, with a gradual S curve in a 55 mph speed zone. Curves have warning signs to reduce speed to 45. In the middle of the S is a 200 foot long bridge. Weather conditions are light rain, temperature right around 32 degrees. The bridge will freeze, the roads leading into it will not.

He drives onto the bridge at about 55 mph. Rear end will slide from the corner and ice, setting up a skid. He attempts to correct but is sliding as he exits the bridge, traveling in a straight direction, but the road curves. He goes over the edge of the pavement, and ends up sideways. There's a slope and the car goes rolling sideways (rather than end-to-end). Four rolls would be reasonable, and speed when he goes off the road would be about 45 mph. He won't have lost a lot of speed because of the ice.

Modern cars are designed to crush, older cars do not crush. Thing about crush zones is they absorb energy, rather than transmitting it to the passengers. Deformity to the car might be minimal and the car might be drivable. Meanwhile the passengers slam into every side of the car as it rolls.

Both passengers could reasonably be dead. Driver is held somewhat better in position than the passenger (shotgun seat is sometimes called the "death" seat) because of the steering wheel. Driver doesn't need to hit the steering wheel as being thrown around the car would produce the injuries you want. A good touch is to have the driver found underneath the passenger with the car on its side.

Charges could be anything from nothing to reckless operation with homicide. Specific terms for the charges would require looking them up for Georgia.

Civil lawsuit would be pretty much automatic, but normally the policy limits are going to limit how far this lawsuit goes. Let's say the policy has a 100/300 limit per accident. That means the insurance company only pays $100,000 for the dead guy. More than likely, the insurance company would write a check for $100,000 and call it quits.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Christabelle · Dec 3, 2014

Thanks guys!

cmhbob said:
The passenger's family can sue without a citation; anyone can pretty much sue anyone else for just about any reason. And I don't know about GA traffic laws, but in Ohio, the failure to control was almost an automatic for any crash, so I don't know how much weight that would carry in a civil suit, especially if they opted for a bench trial.

Maybe the driver's family says "Look, it was a terrible accident, but the reality of it is that he could have recovered if the county did a better job of fixing the road. We're suing the county over that. blah, blah, etc."

That sounds like a reasonable solution. I'm curious now: since the father and mother are both county employees (sheriff's deputy and elementary school principal), what implications would such a suit against the county have on their jobs?

Maryn said:
The family of the girl who died sued for $20 million, hiring the law firm which represented OJ Simpson, and the trucker who could not avoid hitting her when she came out of the vehicle sued for $3 million. There were elements of race and class at trial and we suspect the family mistook us for wealthy and attempted to turn their tragedy into a windfall.

The trucker received nothing, and the girl's family received the amount of our insurance--and her mother was ordered to repay the disability she received for being unable to work from that money. I think it was $20,000. There was some race- and class-based name calling as we left the courthouse. A lovely time was had by all.

Maryn, lying

That sounds like a miserable situation.

I don't want my two families to end up in a trial like that. The passenger's family will attempt to seek damages from the driver, but perhaps they can work together against the county?

jclarkdawe said:
Okay, let's set up the accident. Two lane road, with a gradual S curve in a 55 mph speed zone. Curves have warning signs to reduce speed to 45. In the middle of the S is a 200 foot long bridge. Weather conditions are light rain, temperature right around 32 degrees. The bridge will freeze, the roads leading into it will not.

He drives onto the bridge at about 55 mph. Rear end will slide from the corner and ice, setting up a skid. He attempts to correct but is sliding as he exits the bridge, traveling in a straight direction, but the road curves. He goes over the edge of the pavement, and ends up sideways. There's a slope and the car goes rolling sideways (rather than end-to-end). Four rolls would be reasonable, and speed when he goes off the road would be about 45 mph. He won't have lost a lot of speed because of the ice.

Modern cars are designed to crush, older cars do not crush. Thing about crush zones is they absorb energy, rather than transmitting it to the passengers. Deformity to the car might be minimal and the car might be drivable. Meanwhile the passengers slam into every side of the car as it rolls.

Both passengers could reasonably be dead. Driver is held somewhat better in position than the passenger (shotgun seat is sometimes called the "death" seat) because of the steering wheel. Driver doesn't need to hit the steering wheel as being thrown around the car would produce the injuries you want. A good touch is to have the driver found underneath the passenger with the car on its side.

Charges could be anything from nothing to reckless operation with homicide. Specific terms for the charges would require looking them up for Georgia.

Civil lawsuit would be pretty much automatic, but normally the policy limits are going to limit how far this lawsuit goes. Let's say the policy has a 100/300 limit per accident. That means the insurance company only pays $100,000 for the dead guy. More than likely, the insurance company would write a check for $100,000 and call it quits.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

That setup sounds exactly like what I wanted to happen. Could the driver have the injuries needed and still have been buckled in? Guess I could have the belt break, but I'm kind of hung up on him having chest and lung injuries along with the others. If the scenario you described occurred with the car ending up on its side with the driver under the passenger, would that be driver's side down? (Trying to picture the result)

The insurance outcome sounds okay for dealing with the dead guy. Then perhaps they can co-file against the county?

jclarkdawe · Dec 3, 2014

Here's a good summary of government responsibility for maintaining roads --

As mentioned above, the city, county, or state charged with maintaining the road where your accident occurred may be responsible for any damage caused by poor road conditions. The theory here is, because it is the government’s job to maintain the roads, the government is also responsible for any damage that results when roads aren't kept reasonably safe. The key here is what is considered "reasonable." The government won't always be responsible simply because your vehicle was damages by the questionable condition of a road.
State laws typically allow the government a reasonable amount of time to discover poor road conditions and a reasonable amount of time to repair them. Governments generally discovery dangerous road conditions in one of two ways:

through individuals reporting a dangerous condition, and

by conducting regular surveys of the roadways.

If the government has not discovered a dangerous road condition, there is a good chance it will not be responsible for any damage the condition causes. The one exception may be, if the dangerous condition has been around long enough that the government should have discovered it. In that case, the government may still be on the hook even though it did not actually know about the poor road condition.
Also, the government will not likely be responsible for damage caused by a dangerous road condition if it has not had enough time to repair the condition. Bottom line: If you are going to make a successful claim against the government for damage to your vehicle caused by poor road conditions, you will have to prove two things:

the government knew about the poor road condition (or should reasonably have known about it), and

the government did not repair the poor road condition within a reasonable amount of time.

Chances of winning are somewhere between slim and a snowball in hell. I'd have to do a lot of thinking to come up with a scenario where the county is responsible for the accident. A poor shoulder isn't going to cut it. You're supposed to expect that shoulders aren't well maintained.

If the passenger is not seatbelted, and the driver is, and especially if you have a bunch of junk in the car, understand that everything that isn't anchored to the car (in other words, only the driver) becomes a projectile. All flying around the car at forty or more miles per hour. All whacking the crap out of the driver.

Modern cars with a three-point seat belt keep a person well centered in a seat that's designed for that. A bench seat, on the other hand, has no lateral support, and doesn't isolate the occupant compared to a modern car. No head rest to provide support to the head.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Christabelle · Dec 4, 2014

jclarkdawe said:
Here's a good summary of government responsibility for maintaining roads --

Chances of winning are somewhere between slim and a snowball in hell. I'd have to do a lot of thinking to come up with a scenario where the county is responsible for the accident. A poor shoulder isn't going to cut it. You're supposed to expect that shoulders aren't well maintained.

If the passenger is not seatbelted, and the driver is, and especially if you have a bunch of junk in the car, understand that everything that isn't anchored to the car (in other words, only the driver) becomes a projectile. All flying around the car at forty or more miles per hour. All whacking the crap out of the driver.

Modern cars with a three-point seat belt keep a person well centered in a seat that's designed for that. A bench seat, on the other hand, has no lateral support, and doesn't isolate the occupant compared to a modern car. No head rest to provide support to the head.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Looks like I can throw all the junk I want to at the driver -- including the passenger.

So basically, suing the county would be pointless. Guess I'll stick with the passenger's family filing a civil suit and insurance paying out. What sort of time line would there be on that? Could it be finished in less than a year?

Would the driver receive any insurance payment?

Any stipulations for parties avoiding contact during the suit? The passenger has a younger sister that I would love to have wreak havoc on the driver for "murdering" her brother.

jclarkdawe · Dec 4, 2014

Payout on a low policy limit ($100k is low for a fatality) can happen as quickly as two or three days after the accident. I've seen people paid in the hospital. Definitely would settle within a year.

No limitation on contact between anybody.

Driver would have to show someone else was negligent. However, I did think of a way to make the county liable. In both directions, there were signs warning that the bridge freezes early. (I can't remember what the sign says exactly.) One year earlier, a car going the other way, slides on the frozen bridge, and takes out the sign your driver should have seen.

As well as causing the driver of the other car to be seriously injured.

You now have the county having knowledge of the risk, and the county responsible for conveying knowledge of the risk. Problem is the county hasn't replaced the sign. Despite the fact the local newspaper ran a story in November about the fact that the county wasn't replacing hazard signs, and including this hazard sign in the article.

County will fight this for years. Probably will settle at trial about 5 years later.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Christabelle · Dec 8, 2014

jclarkdawe said:
Payout on a low policy limit ($100k is low for a fatality) can happen as quickly as two or three days after the accident. I've seen people paid in the hospital. Definitely would settle within a year.

No limitation on contact between anybody.

So, did I get this right? The dead guy's family gets an insurance payout. The driver doesn't (unless county's negligence is shown, which will take a long time). And the dead guy's sister can be as vindictive as she wants to.

Driver would have to show someone else was negligent. However, I did think of a way to make the county liable. In both directions, there were signs warning that the bridge freezes early. (I can't remember what the sign says exactly.) One year earlier, a car going the other way, slides on the frozen bridge, and takes out the sign your driver should have seen.

As well as causing the driver of the other car to be seriously injured.

You now have the county having knowledge of the risk, and the county responsible for conveying knowledge of the risk. Problem is the county hasn't replaced the sign. Despite the fact the local newspaper ran a story in November about the fact that the county wasn't replacing hazard signs, and including this hazard sign in the article.

County will fight this for years. Probably will settle at trial about 5 years later.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

I hadn't thought about the bridge signs. That could definitely work. A bit on the long, drawn out time frame, but it could definitely have some bearing on the direction of my story.

Thanks!!

Christabelle · Dec 10, 2014

I might be crazy, BUT I just came up with a new scenario. Would it be possible for a second vehicle to be involved, driving erratically, and either lightly hit or force the first car to lose control? Same environmental factors: curve, icy bridge, bad shoulder, hill.

If the driver of the second vehicle left the scene and didn't come forward for months, how would the situation be different? Being a fatality, how would the driver (also a teen) be cited/punished/etc. after finally coming forward?

shaldna · Dec 11, 2014

Christabelle said:
What are the legal repercussions of the following situation?

Two 17-year-olds are involved in a one-vehicle accident. The car belongs to the passenger, who is too intoxicated to drive. It's a vintage fixer that he and his father have been working on and isn't equipped with airbags. The passenger isn't wearing a seatbelt and is killed on impact.

The driver survives the crash but has serious injuries due to seatbelt failure, impact with the steering column, etc. Any blood work or tox screen comes back clean for drugs and alcohol.

Road conditions are icy and poorly maintained. It's a hilly, rural road with crumbling shoulders. The car spins out on ice and rolls approximately four times.

Can any charges be files against the driver? Is so, what? Negligence? Failure to maintain control?

Would the family of either party have a legal case?

In own experience of a similar accident - I was driving my dad's car - for whih I was insured but only thrid party through my own insuance. I was driving slowly on a road I knew well, spun out on some ice and hit a telegraph pole.

Here's what happened with me - nothing.

Nada. The insurance company wouldn't even come out to collect the car. I was left stranded about 20 miles from home on a country lane with my daughter in the car.

I called both my insurance company and my dad's to inform them. Called the police and the DOE to report the damage to the pole - which was minor and I did offer to pay for. And then I had to sit and wait for someone to come and collect me and my daughter since neither of us were injured and so didn't warrant an ambulance or police car to take us home. That was a long, cold morning.

And that was basically that. It stayed on record for 6 months with the insurance people just in case someone came forward to put in a claim,but since it was only me andmy daughter no one did.

A year later and I had another accident - this time I wasn't driving. I was slightly injured, and because the driver - who was insured - was a learner and there was a hazzard on a main road the police came out, gave us an incidenet number but no one was breathilized or anything and we just gave teh incident number to the insurance company, who then handled my claim for the injurt i recieved - in this case it wasn't another vehicle but rather the road service who were responsible - that took a long time to process I do remember.

One big issue here is with insurance - if you don't have it you are in serious trouble.

Here a learner can't drive on their own, they have to be with someone in the passenger seat who has a full licence and is sober and awake otherwise their insuance is invalid. That could be a potential issue.

jclarkdawe · Dec 11, 2014

I'm a bit confused here as to what you're trying to do. If you want an insurance/court battle, you need a lot more information than this forum is going to get you.

If the other driver disappears, and was negligent, the insurance company for the car/driver would look at the uninsured portion of the insurance policy. This part of the policy varies a lot from state to state.

When the driver finally shows up, he'd be charged with a felony level hit and run.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Christabelle · Dec 11, 2014

Shaldna, thanks for sharing your experience.

My driver(s) is/are fully licensed and beyond the learners permit stage. Other than being on the road after midnight, they're within the bounds of the GA provisional license.

Jim, sorry for the confusion! I don't want the legal battle to be a huge factor in this story. It deals primarily with the driver who flipped the car and his relationship with the family of the passenger who died. I was thinking for a bit more conflict, I might have it be a hit-and-run but with no conclusive info at first. I'm wondering what if the driver who ran away eventually came forward during the course of this story. What would happen to her?

I know the driver who is blamed for the wreck is consumed with guilt, and he has to deal with his friend's sister repeatedly blaming him. I thought, since the main part of the story takes place 9 months after the wreck, that it might be interesting to throw in some legal complications, but I don't want him in the middle of a trial ... unless the hit-and-run driver shows up.

I don't know exactly what I need. I'm just trying to come up with a balanced portrayal with all the emotions and struggles I want for my MC.

WeaselFire · Dec 14, 2014

Christabelle said:
I might be crazy, BUT I just came up with a new scenario. Would it be possible for a second vehicle to be involved, driving erratically, and either lightly hit or force the first car to lose control? Same environmental factors: curve, icy bridge, bad shoulder, hill.

There doesn't need to be contact. Ever swerve to avoid a squirrel? Try it on an icy hill, in the dark, near a menacing precipice...

The squirrels always win.

Jeff

Legal repercussions of single vehicle accident? Updated question in post #14

Christabelle

Maryn

At Sea

jclarkdawe

Feeling lucky, Query?

cmhbob

Did...did I do that?

Christabelle

cmhbob

Did...did I do that?

Maryn

At Sea

jclarkdawe

Feeling lucky, Query?

Christabelle

jclarkdawe

Feeling lucky, Query?

Christabelle

jclarkdawe

Feeling lucky, Query?

Christabelle

Christabelle

shaldna

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

jclarkdawe

Feeling lucky, Query?

Christabelle

WeaselFire

Benefactor Member