Evaluate this fact pattern
| Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Hateful shrine | 02/28/24 | | filthy canary bawdyhouse | 02/28/24 | | coral cerebral set | 02/28/24 | | domesticated business firm | 02/28/24 | | Opaque Market Selfie | 03/01/24 | | Claret bonkers rigor | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Peach tanning salon | 02/28/24 | | filthy canary bawdyhouse | 02/28/24 | | Wonderful Home Puppy | 02/28/24 | | deep deranged quadroon | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Wonderful Home Puppy | 02/28/24 | | Peach tanning salon | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Wonderful Home Puppy | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Peach tanning salon | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Startling Adventurous Parlour | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Splenetic fragrant cruise ship scourge upon the earth | 02/29/24 | | Glassy stirring death wish | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | cordovan rehab | 02/28/24 | | ruby pit | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | umber temple macaca | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | umber temple macaca | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Sooty razzle-dazzle mother community account | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | filthy canary bawdyhouse | 02/28/24 | | aromatic ocher boiling water jew | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | vigorous yapping hairy legs hell | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | house-broken institution potus | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | burgundy school cafeteria | 02/28/24 | | odious crystalline stage masturbator | 02/28/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/28/24 | | Splenetic fragrant cruise ship scourge upon the earth | 02/29/24 | | Hateful shrine | 02/29/24 | | coral cerebral set | 02/29/24 | | cordovan rehab | 02/29/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 02/29/24 | | Bateful Site Halford | 03/01/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 28th, 2024 12:54 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
So plaintiff is driving north on a one lane road (one lane north one lane south) when a southbound car comes careening toward him and crosses into his lane of traffic. Plaintiff pulls to the right to try to avoid the collision and contact between the cars is defendants driver side front to plaintiffs driver side rear tire well.
Defendant claims to cops that his front driver side tire “popped” before the crash and that he heard a bloosh sound of the pop and then the car started pulling to the left into plaintiffs lane of traffic.
Photos of the tire in question clearly show that it’s now flat but it’s unclear whether the tire was damaged before or as a result of the impact.
No one else beside defendant heard the bloosh sound. Plaintiff says he saw defendants face right before impact and defendant was looking down right before impact. A Second witness who was in another car who avoided impact from careening defendant says she heard no bloosh and that defendant smelled of weed after the crash. Assume last part gets in … it’s a bench trial and witnesses say stuff you can’t always keep out. ).
Defendant says he bought his car 30 days beforehand and never took to garage, just gave it a once over at wawas right after purchase to make sure oil and air pressure were good. Paid $1200 for it. 20 year old Honda. Missing hubcap on another tire. Mismatched engine cover. 180,000 miles on it. Bought from a Mexican on Facebook. Admits tires were probably retreads.
Plaintiff incurs $12000 in medical bills but this amount can easily be reduced post trial. There’s only $30k in possible coverage.
As plaintiffs counsel do you have Bench trial or do you settle for something under $30k. ? Why why not
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47447295) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 4:44 PM Author: Wonderful Home Puppy
yes, i do. what he is describing is a classic "two lane" road.
===
A two-lane expressway or two-lane freeway is an expressway or freeway with only one lane in each direction, and usually no median barrier. It may be built that way because of constraints, or may be intended for expansion once traffic volumes rise. The term super two is often used by roadgeeks for this type of road, but traffic engineers use that term for a high-quality surface road. Most of these roads are not tolled.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448183)
|
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 5:47 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
Sure. But how do you describe the roadway in talking with people? If you say two lane roadway in the context of a car crash, many if not most people are going to think of a roadway with a left lane and a right lane both going in the same direction, not the road at issue here. I try to avoid that confusion from the start by saying what I mean.
But if it makes you feel better, I can simply say a two lane roadway now that we’ve addressed this material point.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448426)
|
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 7:27 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
Good man.
I settled for $20k.
I legitimately was concerned that a judge would say “look if you say it’s negligent to operate such a car on the streets of xxx town then 20 percent of the drivers here would be negligent every day.”
The weed testimony would be from a white Karen type woman testifying about a black man fwiw.
At $20k I will probably net about $5k as will the plaintiff. We will do a fee split rather than my contractual third as that’s the classy approach for long term career type practice imho and no client can ever say the lawyer took more than the client
I actually asked plaintiff if I could try it for fun but reminded him it was his money and he said no because he didn’t want the medical bills to mess up his credit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448794)
|
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 8:03 PM Author: umber temple macaca
20000 * 2/3 = $13,400
$13,400 minus $8,000 = $5,400
$5,400 minus fees and costs = ~$4500
so your client is walking away with 4500 cash in pocket?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448888) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 8:07 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
It will be closer to $5500 as costs are not really that high.
I’m not normally allowed to depose the defendant before a bench trial like this but I agreed not to take judgment over coverage limits in exchange for the additional information a brief deposition on defendants automobile maintenance issues would net me.
As I said, I’m really good at what I do.
And remember my fee in this case was the same as what client nets. I reduce my contracted fee of one third in the event that I would otherwise net more than client. I pride myself on my work.
The actual math is 8000 to specials, 1000 to costs, $5500 or so to me and $5500 or so to client.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448898)
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 8:24 PM Author: aromatic ocher boiling water jew
Evaluating the fact pattern from a legal standpoint, the decision whether to proceed with a bench trial or to settle for an amount under the $30k insurance policy limit requires careful consideration of several factors. The defendant's vehicle crossing into the plaintiff's lane prima facie establishes liability, especially given the circumstances leading to the collision. The defendant’s explanation that a tire pop caused the vehicle to veer unexpectedly could introduce an element of unforeseeable mechanical failure, which might complicate the liability aspect. However, this defense is weakened by the defendant’s admission regarding the lack of vehicle maintenance, the use of retread tires, and the overall condition of the vehicle as described. Further undermining the defendant's credibility is the plaintiff's observation that the defendant was looking down immediately before the impact and a witness's comment about the defendant smelling of weed after the crash. These elements suggest potential negligence or impaired driving on the defendant's part.
Given the strength of the evidence suggesting negligence, the plaintiff's counsel must weigh the likelihood of securing a judgment that exceeds the available $30k insurance coverage against the risks and costs associated with trial. The presence of $12,000 in medical bills, which could potentially be reduced, also plays a crucial role in this decision-making process. If the plaintiff's counsel believes that the evidence of negligence is compelling and that a judge in a bench trial would be receptive to these arguments, proceeding to trial could result in a judgment that fully utilizes the available insurance coverage or potentially exceeds it, considering the defendant's personal assets. On the other hand, settling for an amount under the $30k limit could provide a guaranteed outcome for the plaintiff, avoiding the uncertainties and expenses associated with trial. The choice ultimately depends on a strategic assessment of the likelihood of success at trial, the potential for a higher recovery, and the plaintiff's preferences regarding risk and resolution timing.
Considering the evidence indicating negligence on the part of the defendant, including the condition of the vehicle and the circumstances leading to the accident, I would lean towards proceeding to a bench trial. This decision is based on the strength of the case against the defendant and the potential to fully utilize or exceed the available insurance coverage, thereby maximizing the compensation for my client's damages and injuries. The trial presents an opportunity to argue the points of negligence and liability effectively before a judge, especially given the compelling evidence and witness testimonies.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448959) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 8:28 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
Outstanding! Wow! Holy shit! The conclusion to try the case was actually wrong unless the plaintiff is not economically vulnerable otherwise but I love this nonetheless.
Run the same thing this time with the adverse credit hit on plaintiff if it’s a defense verdict. Curious to see what our future overlord has to say.
This AI is really incredible. The only defect or analysis omission straight up besides bets on admissibility and bad rulings on evidence is the consequence to the plaintiff of taking a $12k credit hit if the judge found we don’t meet our burden of proof.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448972) |
Date: February 28th, 2024 8:36 PM Author: vigorous yapping hairy legs hell
you should have no trouble getting actual meds. what kind of evidence are you going to be able to show for paying suffering and loss enjoyment of life?
looks like a MIST case to me. death
you should have liability for either driving or car maintenance, seems not a punitive case
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47448982) |
Date: February 28th, 2024 9:08 PM Author: house-broken institution potus
“I agreed not to take judgment over coverage limits”
“As I said, I’m really good at what I do.“
You should be sued for malpractice and you should lose.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47449062) |
|
Date: February 28th, 2024 9:12 PM Author: Bateful Site Halford
Think about it for a minute
In fairness. You don’t know about the automatic appeal to a higher trial w jury and full range of costly discovery that is available here if either side doesn’t like the result w the bench trial
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47449076)
|
Date: February 29th, 2024 12:57 PM Author: Splenetic fragrant cruise ship scourge upon the earth
"Dad, is it in yet?"
(SP jr, with his palms resting against playroom wall)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5497142&forum_id=2#47450738) |
|
|