Automobile Accidents

April 2, 2014

Lyft, Sidecar and Uber: Great Service But Lots of Legal Issues

Have you seen cars driving around Nashville decked out with a fuzzy pink mustache? The pink mustache is the logo, if you will, for Lyft, a ride-sharing service. Lyft, Ubert and Sidecar all operate in much the same manner. For Lyft, individuals who need transportation can summon a driver by using their phones — the companies have apps for their services. A pre-screened driver then picks up the individuals and takes them to their destination. The driver does not charge a fare but instead takes a "donation." The cost associated with these types of ride-sharing services has been estimated to be 30% less than a traditional taxi, which is wonderful for the consumer.

But there are some questions related to these services. While these ride-sharing services are quasi-taxis, they are not currently subject to a number of regulations applicable to taxis and limousines. For instance, the drivers do not have to have chauffeur licenses. While the vehicles must be a 2000 model year or later, the vehicles are not subject to inspections. Unlike Nashville taxis, there is not presently a requirement that they be licensed by the city’s Transportation Licensing Commission.

And then there is the issue of liability and insurance. Lyft’s website indicates that it does criminal background checks and Department of Motor Vehicle checks for all of its drivers. These checks are designed to weed out drivers who have been convicted of a DUI, a violent crime, etc. Lyft also requires its drivers to have the state minimum in insurance coverage and then Lyft has its own, additional $1,000,000 liability coverage.

March 30, 2014

Tennesseee Teen Drivers: New (and Scary) Information about Texting and Drinking While Driving

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

While knowledge may be power, it does not necessarily translate into positive action as evidenced by a recent study from Liberty Mutual Insurance and SADD (Students Against Destructive Decisions). According to the study, most teens understand the dangers associated with drinking and driving and texting and driving, but they continue to engage in these behaviors. The study also shows teenagers have an alarming definition of what constitutes a designated driver.

The report showed almost all teenagers (96%) understand the distraction associated with texting and driving or talking on the phone and driving. In fact, 62% of teenagers agreed that it is very or extremely distracting. Yet, 86% of teens still do it. The same applies to drinking and driving. While 86% of teenage drivers think drinking and driving is very or extremely distracting, more than two-thirds of the teenagers who admit to doing it also admit to doing it after consuming more than three alcoholic beverages.

As for the concept of a designated driver, 21% of teens think that means the driver is "basically sober," i.e., the driver can have some alcohol as long as they do not become too impaired. 4% of teens think a designated driver means selecting the most sober person in the group to drive. These numbers show us just how much more needs to be done to get teenager drivers to comprehend just how lethal these behaviors can be. Talk to your kids, model good behavior (i.e., don’t text and drive yourself), use an app that will auto-respond to incoming texts to let the sender know the receiver is driving or consider using a device like CellControl.

March 23, 2014

Liability of Parents for Teenage Drivers

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, teenage drivers (age 16 to 19) are three times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than drivers over the age of 20. In the face of these statistics, the Wisconsin Senate has passed a bill which would limit the amount of money a person could recover from a negligent teenage driver’s parents.

Currently, in Wisconsin, parents are responsible for any harm caused by their child who is under age 18. In fact, the teen driver must be sponsored by a parent who actually signs for the teen to be allowed to obtain a license and agrees to be responsible for the harm caused by the teenager. Under the proposed legislation, parents would only be responsible for up to $300,000.00 for the harm caused by their teenage child.

So let’s assume, the teenage driver was texting and crosses the center line and kills another driver and renders the passenger a quadriplegic. The damages would be capped at $300,000 even though the medical bills and future care for the passenger would be in the millions of dollars and someone lost their life due to the teenage driver’s negligence.

March 18, 2014

Punitive Damages for Texting and Driving

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

In California, an appellate court is being asked to consider whether a texting driver can be held liable for punitive damages. Punitive damages are intended to punish the wrongdoer and, hopefully, deter others from engaging in the same harmful conduct. In the texting while driving context, the argument is that by texting while operating a vehicle, the driver “consciously disregarded” the safety of others on the roadway. The same argument is used in drunk driving cases.

While texting and driving is definitely illegal in Tennessee, this issue of whether a driver who was texting and driving can be held liable for punitive damages has not yet been decided by Tennessee courts. Of course, proving the driver was texting will often be an issue. In the California case, a witness testified the driver had been testing for a while and had swerved in and out of lanes before finally losing control and injuring someone. And of course, if there is reason to suspect the driver was texting, a subpoena can be issued for the drivers’ phone records.

Please do not text and drive. It could cost a life – maybe your own. If you or a loved one has been injured in a car accident, contact one of our award-winning lawyers for a free, no-obligation consultation. Call us any time at 615-742-4880 or toll-free at 866-812-8787. For information about fees, click here.

February 20, 2014

Wine in Grocery Stores and Liquor Liability in Tennessee

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Today, Tennessee saw a historic change in its liquor laws. The House passed a bill to allow grocery stores to sell wine. The Senate had previously passed its version of the bill last month and proponents anticipate the Senate will approve the minor changes made by the House. As for the final step, Governor Haslam is expected to sign the bill as he has previously indicated he would defer to the Legislature on this issue.

Whether you are for or against the passage of the law, one thing is for sure: the privilege of being able to sell wine also carries some responsibility. Let’s review the basics of Tennessee liquor liability law, which were passed by the Tennessee Legislature. The statutes make it quite clear that the consumption of alcohol, rather than the furnishing of it, is the proximate cause of any injury. What does this mean? It means if you go to the grocery store, buy and then drink a bottle of wine and somehow injure yourself due to your intoxication, then you have no claim against the grocery store who sold you the wine. And the law goes one step further: if you go to the grocery store, buy and drink a bottle of wine and then cause a car accident in which you hurt someone else, the grocery store is still not liable.

But, there are exceptions to these general rules: you may have a claim against a grocery store if the grocery store sold wine to a minor or if the grocery store sold wine to an “obviously intoxicated” person. Proof of one of these exceptions must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much higher burden than the ordinary civil case. In most civil cases, the injured party must only prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

February 4, 2014

Could Your Car Help You Avoid An Accident?

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

If you are of a certain age, you probably remember the Jetsons, a Saturday morning cartoon about the future, in which George Jetson drove a vehicle that flew, basically drove itself and avoided crashes with other vehicles and things. Well, according to the United States Department of Transportation, we may soon have cars and trucks that are one step closer to the Jetsons’ vision.

Yesterday, the Transportation Secretary announced it will move forward with vehicle-to-vehicle crash avoidance systems in cars and trucks. The systems use short distance radio networks that can send signals up to 300 yards. Cars and trucks equipped with the crash avoidance systems would essentially talk to one another and provide information about speeds, position and direction. If the crash avoidance system detected an imminent collision, an alarm would sound. In some cases, the warning alarm would sound even before the other vehicle was in view. In terms of timing, the Department of Transportation hopes to have a proposal in place before 2017.

Of course, the system’s effectiveness will be diminished until most vehicles on the road are equipped with the technology. But, this could be a significant step forward in crash protection. And, it comes at a good time. After several years of decline, fatal car accidents increased to 33,561 in 2012. (2013 numbers are not available yet).

January 31, 2014

Driving While Drowsy – Dangerous and Deadly

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, more than 100,000 police-reported accidents each year are directly attributable to driver fatigue. And this figure is almost certainly low because some states do not have coding for fatigue or driver fell asleep and if fatigue is combined with another factor, such as alcohol use, it does not get coded at all, etc. Unbelievably, 41% of drivers have reported actually falling asleep at the wheel, and one in every six fatal car crashes is related to a drowsy driver.

While anyone who is sleep-deprived is at risk for a crash, certain groups are at higher risk. Those groups include: (1) drivers who suffer with untreated sleep apnea syndrome; (2) shift workers who work at night or irregular hours; (3) young drivers (ages 16 to 29) especially males. And, as this trucker will tell you, truck drivers definitely work at night and keep irregular hours. So it is not surprising that the Large Truck Crash Causation Study found that 13 percent of Commercial Motor Vehicle drivers were fatigued at the time of a crash.

Some drivers will try to combat fatigue by drinking caffeine, rolling the window down, turning up the radio or other tricks. But, the U.S. Department of Transportation warns that such tricks are not an alternative for rest and can actually produce a false sense of security.

January 13, 2014

Two Reasons Why There Were Fewer Crash-Related Deaths on Tennessee Roadways in 2013

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

While the numbers are only preliminary, the Tennessee Department of Safety has released the statistics on crash fatalities for Tennessee in 2013. The news is wonderful: traffic fatalities dropped from 1015 in 2012 to 988 in 2013. That is 27 families who did not suffer the pain and turmoil of losing a family member in a car accident.

The Commissioner for the Tennessee Department of Safety believes the improvement is related to stronger enforcement of seatbelt violations and DUI laws. State troopers issued 74,277 seat belt and child restraint citations in 2013, which is a 135.1 percent increase since 2010. Seatbelt enforcement is critical as unbelted occupants were 48.9 percent of the fatalities in 2013.

Similarly, Tennessee state troopers arrested 6,428 motorists for DUI in 2013, which is 90.4 per cent increase since 2010. In 2013, preliminary numbers reveal 211 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes in Tennessee.

December 9, 2013

The Roads Were Icy; A Deer Jumped Into My Path; I Had A Diabetic Reaction — The Defense Of Sudden Emergency In A Car Accident Case

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Let’s start this discussion with how the law handles sudden emergencies. Tennessee law recognizes that a driver faced with an unexpected or sudden emergency which calls for immediate action is unlikely to exercise the same good judgment as a driver who is operating his vehicle under normal circumstances. In the past, a sudden emergency could constitute a complete defense to an injury claim. However, under current Tennessee law, a sudden emergency is just another factor for the judge or jury to consider when determining if the defendant was at-fault for the car accident.

So with that in mind, let’s look at some of the examples above. Icy roads might constitute a sudden emergency, but a judge or jury is less likely to excuse the defendant if he or she was driving too fast for the road conditions. Or, if the defendant driver was texting and driving and failed to brake until the last minute and then slid on ice, the defense is not going to be of much help to the defendant. Many of the same considerations apply to the situation where a deer suddenly appears in your path.

In the diabetic reaction example, to decide whether the sudden emergency defense might apply, we would want to know how long the defendant had been diagnosed with diabetes and therefore how experienced he or she was in managing his blood sugar. We would also want to know what the defendant ate and drank that day, what physical activity the defendant had engaged in, did the defendant take their insulin, what the defendant’s blood sugar readings had been in the days leading up to the accident, etc. If the evidence demonstrates the defendant had failed to properly manage his diabetes, then the defense of sudden emergency is less likely to be successful.

December 8, 2013

Teenagers Continue To Be At High Risk of Fatal Car Accident

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has published some staggering statistics on teenage drivers. Here are just a few of them:

1. In 2010, seven teenagers were killed every single day as a result of injuries sustained in a car accident.

2. Compared to drivers who are 20 years and older, teenage drivers are three times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash.