Types of
Car Accidents

Intersection accidents can occur in a variety of ways. In one common scenario, the plaintiff is rear-ended and pushed into the flow of traffic, exposing them to the risk of a side-impact collision.
Important point is that the negligence of others beyond the defendant-driver intersection can become the cause of intersection accidents.. Negligent design and maintenance can quite easily give rise to an intersection accident. For example, if the city fails to properly maintain the traffic lights at an intersection, and the lights malfunction (i.e., by showing intersecting lanes the “green light” simultaneously) Then that could lead to an accident. Under such circumstances, the injured plaintiff would likely have a right of action against the city for damages caused by their negligent maintenance of traffic equipment.

Rear-end collisions are unique in that the plaintiff might not have had an opportunity to avoid the accident. For example, if the defendant-driver is speeding towards a car that is stopped at a busy intersection. Then the plaintiff in that stopped car does not have a legitimate, safe option for moving out of the way before the rear-end collision occurs.

This dynamic generally means that plaintiffs have a stronger and more certain case against the defendant-driver. Why? The defendant cannot reasonably argue that the plaintiff is at fault for their own injuries. Unless the plaintiff was not wearing their seatbelt or did not have a working airbag system.

Side impact collisions often occur at intersections or during turns. Defendants may be busy at the time of the accident. They may be operating their vehicle without taking the time to evaluate the movement of traffic around them.

Side impact collisions (otherwise known as sideswipe accidents) are among the most dangerous types of car accident context. As vehicles generally have very limited built-in protection from side impacts. There simply is not enough material on the side of a vehicle to absorb the tremendous impact force of a crash. Given this limitation, the full force of impact (or something close to the full force of impact) will affect the plaintiff.

By contrast, if you are rear-ended or hit in a head-on collision. There is substantial material between the point of impact and the individuals within the vehicle. That material is also designed to “crumple” in a way that absorbs as much of the impact force as possible.

Vehicle rollovers are in including types of car accidents that are extremely dangerous. As they lead to a complete loss of control on the roadway. Most rollovers involve top-heavy vehicles, such as jeeps, SUVs, buses, and other large trucks.

Though a careful driver can usually prevent a rollover. There are situations where improper loading of cargo can contribute to a rollover accident and make it that much more difficult for the driver to maneuver their vehicle safely.

For example, a delivery truck that is speeding on a tight curve might experience a rollover accident and wreak havoc on other vehicles sharing the same roadway. Further investigation might reveal that the warehouse crews overloaded one side of the vehicle. Which contributed to the heightened risk of a rollover. The warehouse company and the driver’s company might each. Therefore, be liable for the injuries caused.

Multi-vehicle accidents include any collision that involves multiple vehicles. From a gradual lane-clogging pileup on the highway to a scenario. In which several cars crashed into one another simultaneously.

Multi-vehicle accidents are unique in that there may be multiple defendants. Who is responsible for causing your injuries. Under California law, you may sue and recover damages from each defendant who contributed substantially and proximately to the suffered harm. It can be quite a challenge to prove that each of the defendants is liable. The key to success is in establishing a “causal link” that demonstrates that your injuries were a reasonably foreseeable result of their negligent acts.

Let’s try to understand the main topic
For example, suppose that a defendant speeds towards a red light and smashes the back of a car, leading to a chain reaction pileup. Though the defendant may not have intended to hit you and may not even have seen you from a distance. It could be argued that a reasonably foreseeable consequence of his speeding towards a red light is that the stopped cars at the front would be subject to a rear-end collision.

California implements a modified form of the “joint and several” liability rule. Pure joint and several liabilities normally allow the plaintiff to recover all of their damages from any one defendant. No matter how at fault that defendant is. If you had $1 million in damages, for instance. Then California law would previously give you an opportunity to recover all $1 million from a defendant, who is just 1 percent at fault for your injuries.

Modified joint and several liabilities change the rule so that you can recover all of your economic damages (i.e., medical expenses, wage loss, property loss, etc.) from any of the liable defendants. The non-economic damages (i.e., pain and suffering) will be dangerous. Thus, if you had $100,000 in non-economic damages, a defendant, who is 10 percent at fault could only be made to pay $10,000 for that category of damages.