eel h W The t a rn u T My
Driver’s Early Arrival at the Scene Caused Accident? Erik Carlsson
T
his is a short story, with no pictures or illustrations, but I believe it is nevertheless offering very interesting reading for anyone who works with attorneys or insurance companies with the purpose of determining the cause of traffic accidents. A car driver on his way to an assignment traveled westbound on Interstate 80 in New Jersey. He turned off the highway onto an exit ramp on his right that led up to a two-way north/south local street that passed over the highway. There was no traffic approaching from the left at the end of the ramp, so the driver made a right turn and continued north. About 200 yards north of the intersection is a restaurant on the eastern side of the street. Just as the driver passed the entrance driveway to the restaurant, the driver of a southbound car who was on his way to the restaurant started his left turn, and his car collided with the northbound car.
The accident reconstruction firm presented a detailed report of the accident and the damage to the vehicles, and posited that the plaintiff was the sole cause of the accident. Had he passed the restaurant’s driveway a few seconds later, the defendant’s car would have entered the driveway before the plaintiff’s car reached the scene!
What I said above may sound like bad joke, but it is the opinion presented by the accident reconstruction firm in its report. As expected, the writer of the report explained his reason for his opinion. The defendant was meeting a friend of his at the restaurant when the accident happened. The friend arrived a few minutes before the defendant and had stepped out of his car. He was looking on the road, expecting to see his friend arriving, and saw the collision. But he had also been looking the other way and had seen the plaintiff’s car coming up the exit ramp from the highway. He saw, he testified, that the plaintiff had a red light at the end The left-turning driver stated at the police investiga- of the exit ramp, and he saw that the plaintiff made tion that followed that he didn’t see the oncoming his turn to the right without stopping. In its report, car because he was looking to his left, focusing on the the accident reconstruction firm considered that statedriveway that led into the restaurant’s parking lot. The ment by the defendant’s friend as evidence that the northbound driver stated that he was merely traveling plaintiff violated a New Jersey regulation that states down the straight road when the driver of the oncom- that a driver may not make a right turn on red without ing car suddenly started to turn left, causing the cars first stopping the vehicle. Thus, the expert opined, had to collide. the plaintiff not violated that regulation, but made a The northbound driver naturally was rather upset, and full stop before entering the street, he would have arsubsequently sued the turning driver, claiming inju- rived at the scene a few seconds later, and this would ries, lost wages, reduced value of his new car, etc. The have been enough for the defendant to complete his defendant, or rather his attorney, retained an accident left turn onto the restaurant’s driveway ahead of the reconstruction firm that I believe had been recom- approaching car. Therefore, the plaintiff was the sole cause of the accident. mended by the defendant’s car insurance company.
86 Collision Magazine - Volume 13 Issue 1
Volume 13 Issue 1.indd 86
www.collisionmagazine.com
5/28/2019 9:34:54 AM
