I’m putting this in IMHO because my son got cited for causing an accident so in effect an ongoing court case. I know you’re not a lawyer or my lawyer or distributing legal advice. And since it is a traffic law, mileage may vary on jurisdiction.
Here is the diagram of the accident (North to the top). Here’s what’s bothering me.
Car B is at a stop sign on a side street. Avenue is one way (north to south) so he is looking to his right. There are three lanes marks and three cars are stopped at the intersection. They are leaving enough space for a car to move out of the side street.
NORTH of the intersection, the lane furthest west is double wide but not marked as a separate lane. This allows a turning lane onto side street heading west. I have not seen it from my son’s POV so I don’t know if it is obvious from his perspective that the lane in question is double-wide
SOUTH of the intersection, the double lane is divided so there are 4 lanes total with the far west lane being a right turn only lane onto the boulevard
Of course that unmarked turning lane north of the intersection is used by cars to bypass a backup and get into the marked turning lane south of the intersection.
The accident was caused by my son going from east to west across the avenue thinking three cars stopped and three lanes = safe to go. He t-boned a car (everyone is OK) on the Avenue driving full speed in that turning lane across the intersection. He didn’t see her until the last second. Maybe if she was slowing to make a turn onto side street he would have avoided her. IDK. But here’s my question:
Is what the other driver did legal or illegal? And as a corollary, does she have right-of-way using an unmarked lane to bypass traffic IF not making a turn at the next intersection?
From your description, I assume the patrol officer said/implied the other person had the right-of-way. It’s not clear why they would think that, but as you noted fault is going to boil down to who had the right-of-way in that particular situation.
In my experience, there isn’t always a clear person at fault in an accident. This seems like one of those cases. Your lawyer can advise you on the law in your particular jurisdiction. Perhaps the judge will see it your way.
Where I am, ‘right of way’ does not imply a right. I don’t have the ‘right’ to t-bone cars, even if they are driving the wrong way through an one-way intersection with their lights off on a dark night. So in no case would the question be “was, what the other car was doing, legal?”.
(However, I wouldn’t be charged with anything in any traffic accident case unless someone was injured or a police officer happened to see it. Was the other car driven by an off-duty policeman?).
As I understand it (NY), as long as the car does not leave the road travel surface (including crossing the fog line - that white painted solid line in the right), they can continue on their way around a stopped car. What your son was involved in is very akin to the good smaritian accident where a car stops in the travel lane to let a car make a turn across the road and that car gets t-boned by someone either in the next lane or bypassing the stopped car. AFAIK it would be you son’s fault here unless that other driver crossed the fog line, or left the road surface.
Why were the southbound cars stopped when there was no stop sign there? Was there a backup between the Boulevard and the side street your son was on? Were they just providing a courtesy stop to allow your son to move through? Your son should have recognized this as a dangerous situation and taken extra caution through the intersection. The driver going through the intersection did nothing wrong if he wasn’t speeding as he really couldn’t tell from his vantage point that 3 lanes of cars were stopped to let your son through. Your son should have practically stopped before he passed the third waiting car.
I see this very scenario played out many times a week on my drives and it makes me cringe every time. Sometimes people stop to let someone through when they shouldn’t (like the light ahead was green). I try to plan my way around these choke points if possible (sometimes not possible) even if it means going around the block. Was this his first time at this intersection?
I have a friend who was involved in a similar accident, and she was ticketed for, “failing to yield to a vehicle in an intersection”. The reasoning was, since you hit him in the side, he was in the intersection first so, by law, you are supposed to yield and let the vehicle move through. You can get that ticket dismissed if you can prove he entered the intersection illegally, but it’s often your word against the other driver’s unless it is a photo enforced intersection with cameras.
Coming from a stop sign? It’s almost certainly your son’s fault. He should should have proceeded cautiously in front of the stopped cars and checked to his right for oncoming cars as he was moving through the intersection.
My understanding was it was the other car going full speed, not his son. So what was full speed? 25? 45? The car moving through the intersection should have exercised more caution but since he did not have stop, caution or yield sign he isn’t under an a reasonable obligation to do so.
No one was injured, pay the ticket and learn your lesson. I’d make the son pay the ticket, so he learns that dad doesn’t shield him from the responsibility or consiquences of his actions.
It’s unclear from your diagram. If there is no signal or sign for the north to south traffic and a stop sign for the east to west traffic then it’s clear who is at fault. The north to south car would have to be doing something clearly illegal for it to not be the east to west drivers fault.
This was what I intended to express, and failed to do. This person was driving past 3 cars on his road that were all fully stopped at an intersection, but could not see why they were stopped. This is a situation that requires caution.
True, there could have been an ambulance or police car coming through the intersection. Most likely he was focused on the light ahead and saw that he had a chance to make it. The west bound son should have exercised even more caution. Bet he will next time.
I’m also confused why those three cars were stopped. A stop sign on the side street indicates there is no traffic light and those three cars had no reason to stop. At this point I think it is your son’s fault, but I don’t understand the situation clear enough to say that definitively.
You aren’t supposed to block the intersection. See the California code, for example.
I assume the drivers were waiting because there were cars already on the other side of the intersection and they would have blocked the intersection if they didn’t wait. The OP says that cars use the far right portion of the right lane coming from the north to avoid a backup. The “backup” implies that if the cars hadn’t stopped short of the intersection, they would have had to stop in it, blocking it.
As already mentioned you’ve left out what (if any) traffic controls there are on the 4-lane southbound lanes at that intersection, which would likely answer the question. But as I understand it, the westbound lane having a stop-sign needs to yield the right-of-way to any traffic moving through the intersection before proceeding through it.
The only way I can see this being a question is if the southbound lanes were also at a stop sign or red light. But even then you’re supposed to yield to the traffic coming through to your right, so car B should have yielded to the turning car A going through first. That car A was hard to see or how fast it was going or whether the turning lane was marked don’t really matter.
Like someone else said, perhaps if car A did something illegal like blow through the red light or stop sign without stopping first then car B would have a case as to not being at fault. So, what controls were in place for southbound traffic and did car A follow them?
I’m going to assume that the southbound traffic was stopped because there was traffic ahead and they didn’t want to block the intersection. I’m going to further assume that it was clear in the right turn lane south of the intersection, and Car A was passing on the right in order to make that right turn.
I think this is Car B’s fault – he is crossing traffic and must be aware of the possibility of cars coming from anywhere on the avenue. He should have proceeded cautiously (if at all) across the three clearly marked lanes and paused to make sure no one was coming along on the right to make that turn south of the intersection. That said, Car A should also have exercised more caution, especially when passing on the right with stopped traffic. Be that as it may, Car B had a stop sign and is at fault, in my opinion.
Ah…good interpretation. And if that is the case, I still expect the son is at fault. It appears there are four lanes before the intersection, even if not clearly marked.
Same thing my son was cited for. Ultimately the question seems to be can you use an unmarked turning lane to bypass traffic through an intersection. The other question (for the court) would be if, due to foreshortening, could car be tell it was an extra-wide lane.