Plaintiff’s Case Permitted to Proceed Past Summary Judgment Based on Conflicting Evidence Created by Her Own Testimony

Earlier this month, a state appellate court issued a written opinion in a car accident case that was brought by a woman who was not in either car at the time of the accident, but was struck by one of the cars involved in the accident while she was standing on the corner. The court had to decide if the plaintiff’s case should proceed to trial against both drivers, or only against the driver who ran the red light, causing the accident. In the end, the court held that because conflicting evidence existed about whether both drivers may be at fault, the case should proceed to trial against both defendants.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff worked as a crossing guard for a local school. It was the Friday of the first week of school, and she was scheduled to end her shift in a few minutes when she glanced up the street and noticed a car speeding towards her. She noticed the car was crossing into the lane of opposing traffic passing other vehicles. As the car approached the intersection where the plaintiff was standing, it ran a red stoplight.

At the time the first car ran the red light, a pick-up truck entered the intersection with a green light. There was conflicting testimony as to whether the intersection was clear at the time the pick-up truck entered the intersection. The plaintiff said that it was not clear; however, the driver of the pick-up and several eyewitnesses claimed that it was clear. Regardless, once the pick-up entered the intersection, it was struck by the car that had run the red stoplight. The force from the collision sent the pick-up truck right into the plaintiff, who was thrown against a wall nearby. The plaintiff suffered serious injuries, and filed a personal injury lawsuit against both drivers.

The driver of the pick-up truck requested that the court dismiss the case against him since he had a green light when he entered the intersection. The plaintiff argued that, even if the light was green, it may still have been negligent for the driver to enter the intersection if it was not clear, meaning traffic had backed up to the point of preventing the pick-up from safely exiting the intersection. The court explained that the conflict in the testimony required a jury make the determination, rather than a judge in a summary judgment proceeding. Thus, the case will proceed toward trial or settlement negotiations against both drivers.

Have You Been Injured in an Indiana Car Accident?

If you or a loved one has recently been injured in an Indiana car accident, you may be entitled to monetary compensation to help you recoup the costs associated with your injuries. The skilled personal injury advocates at the law firm of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse have decades of collective experience assisting clients in all types of personal injury matters and would be happy to meet with you to discuss your case. Call 888-532-7766 to schedule a free consultation today. Calling is free, and you will not be billed for our services unless we can assist you in recovering the compensation you deserve.

Related Posts:

Student’s Slip-and-Fall Accident on Patch of Ice Was the Result of an “Obvious and Natural” Condition, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, March 6, 2017

Court Finds Plaintiff’s “Mere Speculation” in Premises Liability Case Insufficient to Survive Summary Judgment Challenge, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, February 22, 2017

Contact Information