You are not logged in.

#1 2008-10-29 12:38:59

aliciab
Member
From: Austin, TX
Registered: 2008-10-17
Posts: 9
Website

Damages Awarded to Student in Bike Accident (Missouri)

Saw this item in one of the legal updates I read & thought it would be of interest.  Note that the cyclist ran a red light, and will only recover $450,000 of the $1.8 million because the jury found her 75% at fault for the accident.

"A Missouri University student whose leg was amputated following a 2005 accident should receive $1.8 million, a jury has decided. The student was struck by a vehicle while crossing an intersection and then hit again and dragged by a Columbia Water and Light truck. Jurors determined that the driver of the first car and the City of Columbia were to blame for 25 percent of the accident."  Greg Mitchell, Columbia Missourian  10/28/2008

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stori … t-lawsuit/

Last edited by aliciab (2008-10-29 12:41:41)

Offline

#2 2008-10-29 12:58:30

dougmc
Administrator
Registered: 2008-06-01
Posts: 591

Re: Damages Awarded to Student in Bike Accident (Missouri)

Good thing she was in Missouri then.  In Texas, I think if  you're found to be 50% or more responsible for the accident, you get nothing from the other parties.  Once the other party hits 51% fault (not sure how it works if there's multiple parties), then you collect that percentage of the damages.

Last edited by dougmc (2008-10-29 18:50:53)

Offline

#3 2008-10-30 07:19:03

MichaelBluejay
Webmaster
From: Austin, TX
Registered: 2008-05-26
Posts: 1,338
Website

Re: Damages Awarded to Student in Bike Accident (Missouri)

It's important to note that the cyclist maintains she had a *green* light.  We'll never know what really happened, but my guess is it's the cyclist's contention that she did not, in fact, run a red, that was responsible for her receiving any damages.

Offline

#4 2008-10-30 07:54:05

dougmc
Administrator
Registered: 2008-06-01
Posts: 591

Re: Damages Awarded to Student in Bike Accident (Missouri)

Perhaps, but in Texas she wouldn't have gotten anything, not if they determined (by whatever means) that she was 75% responsible.

Citation, look for `a plaintiff can recover damages only if his or her percentage of responsibility is less than or equal to 50 percent.' (I guess I was wrong about the threshold -- it seems to be 50%, not 51%.)  It's a tort reform thing.

Offline

Board footer