So you rear-end somebody in an MVA. Many of us have done it or will do it. Consider it the law of averages. You now are the defendant in a lawsuit, and have been told that the act of rear ending another vehicle raises an inference of negligence, and that you must provide a “non-negligent” explanation for what happened. What is a non-negligent explanation?
Napolitano v Galletta ,2011 NY Slip Op 05243 (2d Dept. 2011)
The Second Department has somewhat answered that question. “A non-negligent explanation may include evidence of a mechanical failure, a sudden stop of the vehicle ahead, an unavoidable skidding on wet pavement, or any other reasonable cause”
5 Responses
Now that’s a good one. A bit of common sense but that’s always good.
I had a triboro bridge case at the corp counsel. The Plaintiff took the wrong fork and actually backed up to turn onto the right fork. The city truck creamed them. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. I said “hey the Plaintiff was backing up as per my driver’s Affidavit.”
Motion granted by Judge Weiss. After that I always thought that a Plaintiff could back into a Defendant and win on the issue on negligence — the rear end rule was that strong.
Finally some sanity.
Imagine the Weiss standard in staged accidents.
Actually Justice Weiss is a great Judge. He suggested that I reargue but the case settled.
MVAIC’s current “exhaustion of remedies” argument has been dealt a serious blow:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/REPORTER/3dseries/2011/2011_05497.htm
One appeal too many, once again. Currently, in violation of 6 of 7 No-Fault claims principals, MVAIC requires you to sue all “identified” carriers to conclusion before they will process your claim and consider you qualified, irrespective of proof of no coverage and no matter the fact the insurer has already denied the claim.
MVAIC’s only metric of success is the extent it can deny valid claims for medical care and get away with it. That’s some dark hokum going on there.
Whatever happened to the rule that a driver is always supposed to leave enough room between his car and the car ahead of his, to have a safe stopping distance no matter what the speed? These days, tailgaiting is the norm. The old “one pavement stripe for every 10mph of speed” is as as hoary as William Jennings Bryan’s once-famous nomination speech at the 1896 Democratic Convention. In fact, it is as hoary as the word “hoary.”
You have to leave room Larry but the ole automatic liability on a rear end collision was getting a little out of hand. You can’t stop so fast you drop your tranny. You can’t back up. You can’t just stop where there is a confusion of traffic — say a busy fork — and the poor other car emerges from a scrum and some idiot’s just stopped their consulting their GPS.
By the way I like the Allstate commercials best. With the guy who messes up everyone. You know he’s the GPS, etc. I love it when he shows up to take the motorcycle on the test ride. I wish I got that role.
the most asinine decision written. i remember once being denied sj on a rear end hit up in orange county. the judge told me ‘these are country roads, son’.