Re: [MV] legal case in Sacramento re camo-painted vehicles

From: MROG777@aol.com
Date: Thu Dec 30 1999 - 23:30:15 PST


*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
Okay, here is the scoop from a lawyer's perspective, which I feel I am
qualified to give since I am one. Regarding the lawsuit in Sacramento, there
has been no mention as to whether or not the case is over and done with. If
it has been resolved via settlement or trial, there is nothing the MVPA can
do now. The civil legal system has a theory called res judicata which
translaters into "you can't rehash old cases" in layman's terms. In the
criminal field, its called double jeopardy. Same principle.

Second, there has been no mention as to whether or not the owner of the camo
vehicle was at fault for the accident or not (ie. failed to yield the right
or way or whatever). If he was at fault for the accident, the camo paint
sceme is really a non-issue as he was responsible for the plaintiff's damages
in the first place. Further, (and this will bother most respectible folks),
even if the owner of the camo vehicle was not at fault, most insurance
companies will pay the plaintiff just to go away so they don't have to
continue paying an attorney to defend their insured. This is called a
"nuisance value settlement". For instance, the insurance company could have
paid the other driver $1,500.00 or so to drop her case. It is cheaper to do
this than to take the case to trial and win. From an insurance perspective,
even if you take the case to trial and win, you still lost because you paid
10K to go through a trial and the American judicial system does not allow the
prevailing party to collect attorneys fees in most instances. It doesn't
mean the other driver's case had any merit or that the paint sceme had
anything to do with the cause of the accident. Insurance companies make
"economic" decisions like this all the time.

Regarding lawyers in general. Many are jerks. Most are really good people
who are trying to do the right thing by helping others. We wouldn't have
OSHA and many of the other laws and regulations that keep us all safe if it
wasn't for lawyers or the plaintiff's lawyer who sued a table saw
manufacturer for failing to put a safety guard on its machine because the
cost outweighed what they would have to pay for the occasional finger or hand
that go cut-off.

My 2 cents

Mike Rogers
43 Willys MB
San Diego, CA

===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@uller.skylee.com>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@uller.skylee.com>
Send administrative queries to <mil-veh-request@uller.skylee.com>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 05 2000 - 22:42:39 PST