TheChamp531

iTrader: (3)

I'm not kidding. If my car breaks down and it is on the right most lane, or on the curb, and it gets hit it is NOT my fault. I dunno what planet you are on. For example, If my transmission went out (knocks on wood) and I had to go to the curb with my emergency lights, especially by Texas law, if any car is on the curb you must yield too it aka you must go on the lane left of it if it is sidelined to the right. He is liable ofr a TICKET because he passed the line, but when he PASSES the line and CLEARLY you can SEE HIM THERE, and YOU STILL HIT HIM, means you did it intentionally or you shouldn't be driving because of your vision, lack of knowledge, etc... Would make NO SENSE if the vehicle on his right lane was blocking his car's view, BUT DID NOT HIT HIM, but the OP's car. Most INTERSECTIONS nowadays are FOOL-PROOF, regardless if he passed the line. That person in the car was either NOT PAYING ATTENTION, DID IT INTENTIONALLY, or something else. Likewise, if my car broke down in the MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC and you get REAR ENDED, YOU ARE NOT LIABLE. By most STATE LAWS, #1 You must keep a certain AMOUNT of distance to the rear of the car in front of you REGARDLESS, 99% of cases you would be at fault by hitting someone's rear. 99% of states law provides a YIELD once a car HAS STALLED on ongoing traffic with EMERGENCY LIGHTS.

And if it helps, I asked a State Trooper in Texas which are the roughest here. Also, I also asked my Uncle which is a PO in New York.

Only way I see this being OP's fault is if it was raining horribly or mother-nature caused the driver to hit the OP.
This case will either go 50-50 or OP's not at fault. Of course, we don't live in P.R to really know what would happen. It just depends on the lawyer you have. If your lawyer sucks - you lose, if he is good - you win, if he's in between, 50-50.

leedogg

of course. Every post here (and on all forums in general) is a personal opinion, albeit some are more expert opinions than others. If the OP is using the forum for legal advice, he's in trouble :p nevertheless the op solicited people's opinions so he's going to get them, whether expert or...bat shit stupid

stillhere153

iTrader: (1)

that's all nice and dandy but WHAT DOES THE POLICE REPORT SAY?

there is no way in hell he could be 100% at fault... so I will say 50%/50%

NOTSKERDD

If its 50/50 i would just pay out of pocket. In california any claim over 750.00 is chargeable(goes on you driving record for 3 years).

JwongTLS

One time i had to stomped my brakes cuz i saw a police at light and didnt want to run the yellow. I was even passed the yellow like by at least 1 foot..all the police did was drive pass me

lets say if someone hit me coming from around the corner and the police was still there, who u think the police would cite?

I honestly dont think he would cite me for not running that yellow even tho i passed the pedestrian line.

leedogg

I think he would log the facts and the judge/insurance company would decide who was at fault. Think the insurance company would let you off the hook because you avoided running the light? hehe.

subinf

If you file it. Usually only assholes turn in the other driver.

subinf

Lawyer here. Just don't know anything about PR law. That is why I was vague.

JERU

That is funny...

Will Y.

That's the emergency doctrine and does not apply to OP's case-- OP intentionally stopped beyond the limit line, in the approaching car's right of way. In CA, that means OP is at fault.
There is then a question of comparative negligence if the driver with the right of way could have avoided the accident by moving over in the lane.

All this talk of lawyers and fault will mean nothing to the OP's insurer, which will make the final determination of "fault."