Valued Contributor
Posts: 2,528
Registered: ‎11-11-2010
Any law experts on collision lawsuit?

I have a question regarding a collision lawsuit, specifically a reason cited by the arbitrator. My dad was involved in a collision lawsuit. He was driving straight on green light while plaintiff was driving to the left at the opposing end of the intersection. It ended up as a frontal collision.

My dad was sued (2 months before SOL, not surprising) and went through the arbitration process. Arbitrator decided against my dad with a confusing argument. Arbitrator cited that if my dad was really paying attention as he claimed, then the collision would not have occurred in the first place.

I'm puzzled because I find this line of reasoning to be circumstantial at best. Is this a valid reason? This is the only reason cited by the arbitrator.

In My Wallet:
Citi Forward (12/2010) | Citi Dividend (05/2011) | Chase Freedom (11/2011) | GECRB/PayPal (05/2012)
Discover it (07/2012) | AMEX BCP (09/2012) | TD/Target REDCard (10/2012) | Chase Ink Classic (11/2012)
BofA BBR (04/2013) | FNBO/ (02/2014) | Barclaycard Arrival (04/2014) | FIA/Fidelity AMEX (04/2014)
Valued Contributor
Posts: 2,836
Registered: ‎08-13-2009
Re: Any law experts on collision lawsuit?

I would love to hear from others...


1.  Regardless of whether your dad was paying attention or not, he may not have been able to prevent the accident.

2.  Is there a process if you disagree with the arbitrator?

3.  What are the guidelines the arbitrator needs to follow?