Last post on Sep 20, 2013 at 8:25 AM
You are in the Smart Shopper
What is this discussion about?
#5092 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [marsha7]
Sep 26, 2012 (7:21 pm)
Sep 27, 2012 (3:34 am)
Help me out here...why am I no longer a plaintiff's attorney...maybe my brain is stuck in dumb mode...
#5094 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [marsha7]
Sep 27, 2012 (6:24 am)
maybe my brain is stuck in dumb mode...
I appreciate the setup but I'm not spiking it....
#5095 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [marsha7]
Sep 27, 2012 (8:28 am)
what is a PA?
Pugnacious Ambulance Chaser??
I keed, I keed.
Sep 27, 2012 (9:40 am)
Physician's Assistant....you know, for those of you who use cinder blocks under your car while you change your oil? A P.A. with an automotive background would know how to get the car off you, obviously.
#5097 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [marsha7]
Sep 27, 2012 (6:40 pm)
"I no longer believe you are a PA" It, unfortunately, does not have the power to change reality at this point. Not anymore at least. You, I imagine, are still a plantiff's attorney.
However, I believe the discussion was on the table whether a van stopped in the interstate contributed negligence to a rear-end accident behind it. You indicated no ... which 1. Is far too black and white for any attorney I know, 2. Seems like a concession of any claim under against that van driver/company/carrier, and 3. oh I don't remember the circusmtance too well, but I recall some issue with a UM/UIM ... but it would be a concession of any UM under your own policy against that van driver as well.
Too many concessions that are based in logic and ethics ... it just doesn't add up.
#5098 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [lilyowen]
Sep 28, 2012 (12:08 pm)
In a comparative negligence state, how would you distribute the fault?
#5099 of 5338 Re: lilyowen [euphonium]
Sep 28, 2012 (7:10 pm)
It's not about distributing fault. It's about obtaining a release from the rear-ending party ... which would cite no admission of guilt, but a dollar figure to secure the release. At that point, still no court decision ... rear-ending party is protected and now pursuit begins of all other potentially liable parties, i.e., van driver/owner/business. Their potential knowledge of settlement of rear vehicle may bolster their negotiations, but fact remains that they would rather protect their insured and extinguish exposure through settlement than court where their risk remains and their defense costs soar.
File suit and invite everyone to the game at once and you lose this opportunity to pick off every potentially liable party one-by-one.
No shock that insurance costs continue to rise (along with profit). Redistribution of wealth that really only affects the average insured.
#5100 of 5338 Maybe I am missing your point
Oct 01, 2012 (9:17 am)
but here in GA, if your vehicle is stopped in the road, say, due to traffic ahead of you, and someone rear ends that stopped vehicle, the stopped vehicle carries no liability whatsoever...the charge to the driver who rear ended the stopped vehicle is "following too closely" as you have a duty to be aware of driving consition in front of you...
Now if somebody cut you off and you struck them in the rear because they cut you off and just missed clipping your bumper, that would be a different story...
But with all the traffic jams we have here, traffic often comes to a stop, one second driving 65 and the next coming to a stop...if you rearend the guy in front of you then YOU are at fault...
#5101 of 5338 Re: Maybe I am missing your point [marsha7]
Oct 01, 2012 (10:48 am)
You are 100% correct as we understand how the crash happened. GA must be a Contributory state rather than Comparative Negligence state.