Articles Posted in Car Accident

Earlier this month, a hit and run accident claimed the lives of two children and injured four others. In the wake of the accident, investigators scoured the scene for evidence. Ultimately, their investigation led them to a man whom they believed was driving at the time of the accident. During an interview, the man confessed to driving the car that was involved in the fatal accident.

Since then, prosecutors announced that the man will face serious felony charges related to the accident. According to a recent news report, the man’s first court appearance was last week, when he temporarily left the courtroom, “objecting” to the proceedings against him. While the outcome of the trial remains to be seen, the family members of the deceased accident victims—as well as those injured in the accident—may choose to pursue a civil personal injury claim against the driver.

After a serious accident involving potentially criminal activity, the person alleged to be at fault may very well face criminal charges. A criminal case is intended to hold the allegedly at-fault driver for violating the law—not necessarily for the harm caused to the victims. Along those lines, if the driver is subsequently found guilty, they can face various punishments, including fines, probation and jail time.

The holiday season is always chaotic—and this year is no exception. With more cars on the road and more people rushing from place to place to get last-minute gifts or supplies for their holiday gatherings, the roads can often be a frustrating and dangerous place to be this time of year. Thus, if you find yourself suddenly caught in a multiple vehicle, chain reaction accident—whether it’s this time of year or any other time of year—it is crucial to remain level-headed and prepared for your next steps, no matter how chaotic the situation may seem.

According to a recent local news report, 11 people were injured following a major chain reaction car accident. Based on a preliminary investigation of the accident, a major set of collisions involving approximately 35 vehicles and multiple semi-trucks over the course of half a mile shut down multiple lanes for several hours. Although no fatalities have been reported, two of the 11 people injured had to be pulled from their vehicles, and everyone who was injured was transported to a local hospital for treatment. Local authorities are still investigating the details of the accident.

Chain reaction accidents take place when one event causes an initial car accident, which leads to other vehicles in the vicinity of the initial accident to also collide with each other. In most chain reaction car accidents, the driver who caused the initial crash is usually the at-fault party. This, however, can change based on the circumstances and facts surrounding an accident.

With more people traveling for the holidays this time of year, the risk of an accident taking place is often also higher. Sometimes, no matter how careful of a driver you are, it is impossible to account for all possible scenarios or circumstances because others may be negligent or reckless on the road. Thus, in the event of an accident, it is crucial to know how to best protect yourself and what steps to take moving forward if you decide to pursue legal action after a car collision.

According to a recent local news report, Florida Highway Patrol troopers arrested a driver after a major accident. Local authorities reported that a Chevy was traveling northbound when it went around a semi-tractor and slid into the right lane to do so. While in the right lane, the Chevy collided with the back of a Kia. The impact from the crash split the Kia’s left rear and side open as the car veered off the roadway and onto the right shoulder before flipping upside down. The KIA then slid into a grassy area near the road, where four passengers who were in the back of the vehicle were ejected. The driver and his front-seat passenger survived the crash and were treated for minor injuries, while two of the passengers in the back were pronounced dead at the scene and the other two passengers were severely injured.

The crash was so severe that fire officials had to extricate the driver and front-seat passenger from the wreckage. According to troopers, evidence from the accident indicates that this was a high-speed crash, with the Chevy driving much faster than the speed limit. In addition, the driver refused to participate in a field sobriety test, and troopers believe that the crash was alcohol-related. The accident remains under investigation.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), over 90 percent of accidents involve driver error. Moreover, nearly 35 percent of those accidents involve road rage or aggressive driving. In Florida, road rage commonly refers to the anger a driver experiences when they experience stress or frustration while driving. Road rage is a serious problem in Florida, and a person’s fleeting rage can have long-term and potentially fatal consequences for other drivers, passengers, and bystanders.

While Florida authorities often distinguish between “driver error” and “aggressive driving,” many errors begin with an error and escalate into a rage. For instance, news reports described a harrowing road rage accident that took the life of a pregnant woman. The woman hit a motorcyclist and drove away from the incident. While the motorcyclist did not suffer injuries, he followed her to get information. The motorcyclist and two witnessed tried to get the woman to stop at an intersection; however, she continued driving and went to her home. The motorcyclist and witnesses followed her and waited outside of her home, and called 911. The woman appeared from her house with a firearm and pointed it at the motorcyclist and witnesses. The motorcyclist drew his handgun and shot at the woman multiple times. He remained at the scene of the accident until emergency responders arrived. Tragically, the woman died from her wounds.

• Some common driver errors include:

Recently, news reports described new harrowing details following a Florida Tesla crash that occurred last September. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted an investigation and reported that that the car flew through a yellow light at around 90 miles per hour. The speed limit in the neighborhood was 30 mph. Apparently, as the driver approached reached the intersection, he hit the accelerator to 100%. The driver then sped through the light and slammed into two trees in succession. Following the impact, the car’s battery exploded and burst into flames. The fire reignited at least one time which caused firefighters to experience challenges when trying to extinguish the explosion. The 20-year-old driver and his 19-year-old passenger died at the scene of the accident.

Tesla is frequently under fire for its self-driving or “autonomous” driving options. Many argue that these functions are not nearly as safe as the company touts, and a lack of driver experience and company oversight leads to deadly consequences. However, this accident seems to involve another issue concerning lithium batteries. The NTSB has repeatedly voiced concerns about lithium battery fires in aircraft, Teslas, and other vehicles. The agency has issued safety recommendations urging regulators, manufacturers, and firefighters to prevent and prepare for these types of fires.

Lithium-ion batteries have been the source of highly publicized investigations and recalls. Lithium is the lightest metal with the least dense solid element thereby creating a high-energy-density. This density allows lithium to store more energy over a longer time, compared to traditional batteries. Despite this benefit, the battery poses a serious danger because of its combustible material. A single cell can get hot to the point where it catches fire and spreads to the next cell. This “thermal runaway” effect essentially makes the battery easily catch fire or explode quickly.

The Third District Court of Appeals recently addressed a defendant’s appeal following a jury trial awarding the plaintiff compensatory and punitive damages. According to the facts, the cause of action arises from a car accident when the defendant crossed over the center line and slammed into the plaintiff’s vehicle, causing it to flip over nearly two times. The plaintiff and her children survived, and she filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant. The plaintiff amended her complaint and added a claim for punitive damages, arguing that the defendant was high on heroin at the accident.

Before trial, the parties provided a list of witnesses and any potential expert testimony. The defendant filed an “expert disclosure” for a CPA to testify regarding the plaintiff’s economic damages. Later the same day, the defendant filed a supplemental disclosure for the CPA, indicating that the expert would testify to the defendant’s net worth and the amount he needs to sustain himself. Further, the defendant claimed that the expert would testify about the effect that punitive damages would have on his livelihood. The plaintiff moved to strike the disclosure, arguing it was untimely; the court agreed and limited the CPA’s testimony to economic damages. The defendant testified to his limited financial resources at trial, but he did not call the CPA as a witness. The defendant appealed the jury’s award of punitive and compensatory damages to the plaintiff.

Under Florida law, courts can exercise discretion when determining whether to allow an untimely disclosed witness. Courts should make their decision primarily based on whether the testimony will prejudice the objecting party. Prejudice refers to the objecting party’s surprise, not to the adverse nature of the testimony. Some factors that a trial court should consider including:

A Florida appellate court recently decided a case addressing whether a trial court erred in dismissing a plaintiff’s car accident lawsuit against a deceased defendant. Four years after the accident, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant. The defendant in the case passed away three months before the plaintiff’s action. The lower court removed the deceased woman from the filing and substituted the woman with the personal representative of her Estate. In response, the Estate moved to dismiss the complaint, contending that the court lacked jurisdiction over the action. Specifically, they argued that the action could not proceed because it named a deceased person as a defendant. Further, they asserted that the complaint could not be amended and relate back to the original filing.

Under Florida law, negligence actions must include a:

• A cause of action in negligence;

A Florida appeals court recently considered a Florida car accident case in which the jury had found in the defendant’s favor, despite admissions made by the defendant. The defendant had been driving a car and collided with a motorcycle, resulting in a fatality. The plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant and the case went to trial. According to the court’s opinion, prior to the trial, the defendant made some “admissions” in her deposition, which were admitted at the trial. Despite this, the jury found in favor of the defendant, finding she was not the cause of the crash. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which the trial court denied. On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the jury’s decision was contrary to the evidence presented at trial and that the jury was bound by the defendant’s admissions.

If a party receives a jury verdict that is not in their favor, the party may be able to appeal the decision and other decisions made by the trial court. On appeal, a Florida appeals court reviews the decisions made by the trial court under different standards, depending on the decision. If a party files a motion for a new trial, the trial court will review the decision to see if it was supported by “competent, substantial evidence,” while considering the court’s observations about the witnesses at trial.

Thus, a trial judge can consider, in light of these observations, whether the jury’s verdict was “unjust” or a “miscarriage of justice.” When an appeals court reviews a denial of a motion for a new trial, the appeals court can only consider whether the trial court “abused its discretion” in denying the motion for a new trial. Thus, the appeals court should only overturn the judge’s decision if the evidence at trial clearly and obviously reflected a verdict in the other party’s favor—only where there is “no rational basis in the evidence to support the verdict.” In addition, if a party appeals a jury’s verdict, an appeals court will consider whether the verdict was “contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”

Continue Reading ›