Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Arizona Pedestrian

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

No that’s exactly what I’m saying. AV owner=driver. Driver sued negligent driver. Negligent driver has low policy limits.

AV Owner needs more money. AV owner sues manufacturer for a defect. AV owner gets an expert to write a report. AV Owner gets past summary judgment. AV owner gets a settlement.

The old way was to look for other pockets. AV manufacturers are now the pockets.

I cannot say this any clearer

You are still trying to build a case where none exists. The standard way an accident is treated is the claim adjusters from the two insurance companies look at the fact situation and one settles. That takes care of the vast majority of all accidents.

For an AV owner or driver to sue it will have to be a serious accident - lawyers don't take small cases on contingency. That eliminates most accidents. Then they need a theory why the AV was busted even though it was hit while sitting still at an intersection. And there goes most of the remaining accidents.

So yes there will be some small number of successful attempts to nail the AV manufacturers. But in the overall scheme of things just a hand full. And in some of these they may well find real fault. The Uber debacle being an example. I would not be surprised to see Tesla get nailed as well. But over all the eventual impact on accident rates will likely be so strong as to create a huge push and even protection for the AV guys.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

You are still trying to build a case where none exists. The standard way an accident is treated is the claim adjusters from the two insurance companies look at the fact situation and one settles. That takes care of the vast majority of all accidents.

For an AV owner or driver to sue it will have to be a serious accident - lawyers don't take small cases on contingency. That eliminates most accidents. Then they need a theory why the AV was busted even though it was hit while sitting still at an intersection. And there goes most of the remaining accidents.

So yes there will be some small number of successful attempts to nail the AV manufacturers. But in the overall scheme of things just a hand full. And in some of these they may well find real fault. The Uber debacle being an example. I would not be surprised to see Tesla get nailed as well. But over all the eventual impact on accident rates will likely be so strong as to create a huge push and even protection for the AV guys.

All of this is what I’ve been trying to say for a long time...

And I know how an accident claim works. I was a defense lawyer for a long time.

The theory is the design defect. The expert gets you to a jury. The manufacturer doesn’t want that. 80% of catastrophic injury litigation is building theories and pointing fingers sufficient to get to larger insurance policies from parties that do not want to litigate. Even if it’s frivolous you just need to get over a small threshold hump to get there.

The finger has a new direction to point and it has not been played out yet. It’s all questions of fact for a jury. That’s the problem.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

All of this is what I’ve been trying to say for a long time...

And I know how an accident claim works. I was a defense lawyer for a long time.

The theory is the design defect. The expert gets you to a jury. The manufacturer doesn’t want that. 80% of catastrophic injury litigation is building theories and pointing fingers sufficient to get to larger insurance policies from parties that do not want to litigate. Even if it’s frivolous you just need to get over a small threshold hump to get there.

The finger has a new direction to point and it has not been played out yet. It’s all questions of fact for a jury. That’s the problem.

And how do you raise a design defect when the AV is hit sitting still at an intersection? Or when the AV successfully stops short of impact and is then hit by the car behind it?

And I agree there will certainly be some...including some that are the AV manufacturer's fault under some theory or the other. But that is a normal cost of doing business and expected.

And getting there is no small hump...it is a mammoth mountain. First off you need a suitable case. That means a lot of money potentially involved. Then most need a willing lawyer...which can be an insurmountable problem for most. Than you need to actually get past the summary dismissal. Altogether a formidable mountain for most cases.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

And how do you raise a design defect when the AV is hit sitting still at an intersection? Or when the AV successfully stops short of impact and is then hit by the car behind it?

And I agree there will certainly be some...including some that are the AV manufacturer's fault under some theory or the other. But that is a normal cost of doing business and expected.

And getting there is no small hump...it is a mammoth mountain. First off you need a suitable case. That means a lot of money potentially involved. Then most need a willing lawyer...which can be an insurmountable problem for most. Than you need to actually get past the summary dismissal. Altogether a formidable mountain for most cases.

With no set standards and battling experts, this all becomes factual questions. Most judges won’t summarily dismiss in that case. They’ll want a jury to decide. A jury is often fickle and this new technology would not present well when compared to the injured sympathetic plaintiff.

I agree in your two situations above, the driver is screwed.