I ask this only out of curiosity, not because I have a stake in any legal proceedings of this type. I realize that traffic laws vary from state to state, so I will mention that I am in California, but I’m happy to have the law in other states mentioned as well. Obviously, the law in states that have no-fault auto accident laws won’t be particularly interesting.
As I was walking to work the other day, I saw a woman in a parked car open the driver’s side door wide… right into the path of another car coming down the street.
Luckily, the edge of the door only barely touched the moving vehicle, and although the rubber made a loud pop, it didn’t look like any damage was done to either vehicle. Hypothetically, what if they were a few inches closer and damage had been done?
The street was wide enough that the moving car could have been a a few feet farther toward the center, but it was not dangerously close to the parked cars, either. The door of the parked car was opened as wide as it goes, quickly and (obviously) without looking for oncoming traffic. My guess is that the person in the parked car would be liable for damage. After all, the driver of the moving car can’t very well foresee the door opening all of a sudden, but the person in the parked car can certainly look back before opening the door. But I don’t have much confidence in my guess.
And just if anyone cares - in Britain it would be 100% the fault of the person in the parked car too - in fact there is a specific law against it. (However, anyone driving within door opening distance of a car at more than about 10mph is going to fail their basic driving test, never mind any of the advanced ones)
Actually, it all depends. If you fling your door open without checking for oncoming traffic, yeah, your fault. If your door was open and traffic comes along and clips it, their fault. My friend was getting some stuff out of his trunk and his driver’s door was open. A guy goes to a car parked behind him, gets, in, starts off, and takes out the door. The door was open the whole time. This was on a wide street with no other traffic, so no excuse. The dude tried to take off, but we chased him down and made him give us his information. You better believe he paid.
Of course, without witnesses, it devolves into “He said, she said”. “I swear, he flung the door open just as I was passing him!”
My experience on a legal forum from when similar accidents happens, it is the responsibility of the driver of the moving vehicle to maintain control and avoid all objects while in control of said vehicle. But if someone is opening a door, they must make sure it is clear before opening the door. If the door was open and someone drove into it, the driver of the moving vehicle is at fault. If the driver of a moving vehicle is pulling into a parking space and someone suddenly opens the door and contact is made, the fault lies with the person opening the door. In the OP’s case, the door opener would be at fault.
It’s been a while (7 years?) since I worked claims in Washington state, but I seem to recall that “it depends” at least in Washington. Yes, if the door is standing open and someone comes along and tears it off–the fault falls on the moving vehicle. If the car is parked on the side of the street and the door is opened into traffic without making sure it’sa safe action, then fault falls on the parked car. BUT if you’re in a busy area, like an airport drop off, where cars are coming & going and doors are expected to be opening and closing, then fault falls on the moving vehicle. One could argue that, “Duh the car door opened, that’s what happens in that zone. You should make sure you’re not crowding the stopped cars.”
But, it’s been a while. (here it comes) Check with a claims representative who works claims in your state for clarification. It’s probably not a black and white occurrence liability-wise.
Actually, I’m British too, and I don’t think this is quite correct. When you’re driving, it’s considered your responsibility to anticipate potential hazards, and this could be said to include people in parked cars opening their doors. When I took my driving lessons, it was something I was specifically warned about. Of course, if you’re in a parked car, you are supposed to check it’s clear before you open your door. There are legal responsibilities on both sides, and a lot would come down to interpretation - did the door opener do so recklessly, or was the driver of the moving vehicle just not doing enough of the ‘anticipating’ thing? I’m pretty sure over here it would come down to bickering (expensive bickering) between lawyers and either a magistrate would have to make a call or the two legal claims would just cancel out.
My wife took a door off last summer. A woman in the back seat of a car parked in a no parking zone flung open the door in her path. Minnesota has no-fault insurance. The driver of the parked car had no insurance (Against the law, yet the police didn’t give him a ticket for it). He then went home and called the police to report his vehicle stolen, then claimed he wasn’t the driver (Had the police ticketed the guy, there would have been proff otherwise). So my wife was on the hook for the deductible, and our insurance company was on the hook for the damage.
Wow, that sucks. Even without a ticket, the officer would remember the interaction, though, right? Making false police reports and insurance fraud are big enough deals that they ought to be able to nail the guy even without writing a ticket.
I got the same warning in driver’s ed, and even then I realized it’s 99.9% useless. Unless you stop and wait for all parked cars where someone’s occupying the driver’s seat, you can’t possibly anticipate if someone’s going to open the door in your path. The best you can do is drive at a safe speed at all times. But the law can’t require you to be psychic.
Depends on your police department and their workload.
I talked to a claims adjuster who basically said that the “InsertCityHere” police department wouldn’t investigate insurance fraud that didn’t involve murder, assault or sums over $50K.
She tried to hand the city PD what amounted to 3/4s of a viable auto insurance fraud case, and they basically told her they were too busy to get the rest of the evidence needed to go from “preponderance of evidence” to “beyond a reasonable doubt”.