Strategies For Disproving Driver's False Testimony In A Motor Vehicle Accident Lawsuit

What occurs when you are seriously injured in a vehicle accident caused by another driver but that driver not only denies causing the accident, but even states you were the one who caused the accident? You need to entrust yourself in the hands of an attorney with the experience and the ability to carry out a detailed investigation of the place where the accident took place, who will consider every aspect of the scene, and who has the judgment to know where to gather the proper evidence to rebut the version of the other driver.

This article reviews a lawsuit where the defense attempted blaming the plaintiff. The defendant was a driver of a truck who made a left turn into an intersection and struck the plaintiff’s car. The driver of the car indicated that while he did speed up as he came near the intersection because the light was yellow and was still yellow when he went into the intersection. The driver of the truck, on the other hand, claimed that the driver of the car had been speeding and did not stop for a red light when he went into the intersection. The way the intersection lights were programmed a yellow light for the plaintiff would have meant a red turn arrow for the defendant.

This claim resulted in serious harm to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was forty years old when the accident occurred. He suffered multiple fractures to his forearm that needed internal fixation surgery. He also sustained a head laceration that required some twenty staples to close.

The law firm that handled the matter took the correct approach and did its own full investigation of the accident. First, the attorney became familiar with the scene of the accident (the intersection) and then learned that even if the plaintiff victim’s light had already turned red before he entered the intersection, the defendant truck driver’s left turn arrow would also have been red. The next green would have been for traffic coming from the left of the truck. The defendant truck driver would not have the right of way until that traffic (the driver waiting to the defendant’s left) had a chance to go through the intersection.

The law firm next took the testimony form a representative of the Department of Transportation who verified the exact sequencing and timing of the traffic lights at the intersection where the accident occurred. Combining this with the testimony of a witness who was waiting at a red light to exit the facility at the left of the truck driver that his light was still redwhen the accident happened , the law firm was able to prove that the truck ran a red left turn arrow.

The lawsuit went to trial because the insurance company for the defendant would not settle the matter. It would not settle the lawsuit even with the evidence that the law firm had been able to put together. It would not settle the lawsuit even for the plaintiff’s demand of $300,000 just 1 day before the trial. At the close of the trial the jury apportioned 15% of fault for the accident on the plaintiff and 85% of fault defendant. The law firm was able to report that after accounting for these percentages the victim recovered $467,000.

As this matter shows a thorough investigation of the accident scene, one that finds the evidence which will establish that the accident could not have occurred the way the defendant claims. This requires the experience and the common sense to know what to look for, and the resources to carry on the investigation the right way. Then it becomes a matter of combining the details together in the correct sequence.

The matter further serves as an example of how insurance company adjusters can become so fixated on the insured’s version of the accident that even irrefutable evidence to the contrary will not convince them to settle the matter. This happens a great deal more frequently than many people realize.

Lawyers handling these cases should thoroughly prepare the case for trial in order to achieve an appropriate recovery for the victim.