Of course, I know you can sue anyone for anything. That said, I am curious about this.
I live in a very rural, mountainous area with a huge deer overpopulation. On one 10-mile windy stretch of road there is no place to pull over to let someone pass, the speed limit is 45, and deer run in front of your vehicle almost every day. The other night I was driving home along this road at the speed limit and some numbnut roars up and then gets less than a car length from my bumper. He stays there the entire 10 miles. Meanwhile, I am scanning the roadsides for deer, hoping to god one doesn’t jump out in front of me with this fucktard behind me. Because if I either hit a deer or had to brake to avoid one, moron behind me would have crashed into the rear of my car and at these speeds, could easily kill or maim me.
Got me to thinking - if I had rear and forward dash cams that could record the tailgater’s actions and license plate number, what would be the likely outcome if I sued him in civil court for deliberately endangering my life?
Perhaps a traffic charge for hazardous driving? I’m not sure if the cops would write a ticket based on a video. It would need a clear date & time stamp to prove when the violation took place. Might be worth exploring if the problem on that highway persists.
At least the video might get more police patrolling on that highway.
First, in a situation like that, as aggravating as it might be, the authorities are going to tell you that you should have pulled over and made/let him pass. And in my opinion, that is the right thing to do. There is obviously something wrong with such people and the further away you can get from them, the better - pride be damned.
Second, in the US, I’m fairly sure that you can go down to the municipality or county seat where this happened and swear out a complaint from which a summons will issue just as if it had been written by a cop.
However I also believe that you will have to act as prosecutor. The local prosecutor will not handle the case for you.
I know of people who have done this and won just on the strength of their testimony.
Obviously I’m not stating any of this as legal fact though. But if you’re serious, it’s worth investigating.
I think even if there is no shoulder for all of the 10 miles, if you slow to a crawl with your emergency flashers on, the other person, however ignorant and aggressive they may be, they will probably get the general idea and pass you.
Thank you but I’d prefer this thread not devolve into another tiresome debate about what to do or not do when dealing with tailgaters. That has been done to death in countless other threads here.
My question is about a hypothetical scenario where a motorist collects evidence about a tailgater and takes him to civil court with the intention of suing said tailgater for endangering the life of the tailgated driver. I don’t buy the “no harm no foul” argument - by that logic, if I load a revolver with one round, spin the chamber and fire at you, it’s all fine as long as I didn’t kill you. Um, no. I’d be charged with reckless endangerment or possibly even attempted murder. Similarly, a road-raging tailgater knows that what they are doing is dangerous and could cause a wreck - they don’t care and do it anyway. I’m just curious if this could be successfully pursued in civil court.
Agreed. There could be emotional harm, but the standard for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress is tough. His conduct must have been so extreme and outrageous as to go outside the bounds of decency expected in a civilized society. That doesn’t rise to that level..
The examples you gave are bit different since those are clearly examples of the tort of civil assault and yes you could sue for those. However as was pointed out, since there is no damage I’m not sure how far you would be allowed to pursue the case. It would clear there would be no award so it would be a waste of judicial resources.
The most you could do is try to make a case for intentional infliction of emotional distress, but the bar here is very high so I won’t even go into that. You can research that pretty easily on your own.
However with the tailgater, I really don’t think that even rises to the level of an assault. And I’m not aware of any civil cause of action under tort common law for anything similar to what you are calling “endangerment.”
edit: ah - i forgot one critical factor - intentional torts allow claims of punitive damages, so any legit claim would probably be allowed to proceed to judgment.
I disagree with the other posters. There is the tort of “assault” which means placing another person in fear of harmful or offensive contact. Actual contact or harm is not required.
I don’t know about your state, but in Minnesota, hitting another car from behind makes you 100% at fault. Doesn’t help you if the other person strikes you and pushes you off a mountain, of course. But you may want to check your state laws.
If it is the same person every time, then I’d record their plate and report it to the county sheriffs or state police. Odds are they won’t do anything, but if it comes down to an actual event of harm, you have it on record that you previously reported this person’s negligent behavior.
Otherwise, fuck 'em. You can’t do anything about it and they can’t pass you. Stop fuming and worry about the road in front of you.
No one is “fuming” :rolleyes: This is just a hypothetical legal question. Tailgaters don’t really bother me, I let them pass at the earliest opportunity and let them go their way, not worth getting upset over idiots. However, in this case there was no place to pull over and the situation was extremely dangerous with the very likely chance that a deer would run in front of me. Later on I was just musing over the legal aspects, that is all.
Wouldn’t this be about as futile as trying to sue someone who “almost” hit you, but didn’t?
No harm done besides being annoyed or startled.
No quantifiable loss or damage.
IANAL but it seems to me there must be some sort of concrete economic of emotional damage done in order to have a basis to sue someone in civil court. Being annoyed, startled or apprehensive doesn’t raise it above the damage bar, would seem to me.
Otherwise hey! I’d be able to sue people who annoy or startle me while I’m driving at least once a week!
Could this not be classified as threatening another with a deadly weapon? The tailgater is creating an implied threat of rear-ending you in the hopes that you’ll drive faster to get away.
Many drivers do a similar thing with pedestrians (usually crossing a driveway or uncontrolled side street), letting their car dart forward a few feet towards the pedestrian without touching them, supposedly threatening to run them over, which I’m pretty sure is illegal.
If the area is very mountainous (as stated in the OP), then it might be impossible to pass safely and legally. I’ve had to drive in the Ozarks, and there are roads where it’s impossible to see oncoming traffic until the approaching car is VERY close.