He died at the beginning of April, Nurse Carmen. 
Jar, was the house in joint tenancy or tenanacy by the entireties? If so, full ownership passed to your grandmother when your grandfather died and, as she wasn’t the person at fault for the accident, it can’t be touched, even if there’s inadequate insurance for some reason.
No, we hear you. We just think you’re dense.
Your point is that because this is an insurance matter, she should contact her insurance carrier. My point is that she already DID, and they told her to “Just sit tight for awhile.” (refer to post #4 in this thread). You seem to be having a hard time grasping this simple fact.
As to whether the suit has been filed or not, Jarbaby said her grandmother was being sued in the OP. What exactly do you need to believe that the suit has indeed been filed? A notorized copy sent to you by jar through registered mail?
You might want to consider that the lone voice in the wilderness is usually the one who’s gotten himself lost. Which explains why the wolves have started circling around your campfire.
I will concede this point, because I just found #4 on a replay. Mea culpa. I am happy that hey took my advice before I ever gave it.
She said some clod called Grandma on the phone, said they were going to sue her, and intimidated the hell out of her. Maybe I’m splitting semantic and legal hairs, but if they called ahead of the filing, the suit doesn’t yet exist. If Grandma had been served, I’m sure we would have a decent synopsis of the suit, because it would fuel an even better sh*tstorm than this thread has generated already.
IMAO, they were trying to soften her up, make her panic, and settle before she knew what her legal rights, responsibilities, and protections are.
In my arguable opionion? 
Appropriately enough for this thread, In My Arrogant Opinion
I offered my opinion as someone who had 13 years in the Property and Casualty Insurance business. So sorry if my ‘mooing’ offended you.
Jar I think I can safely say this, everyone here is rooting for your granny!
Go Granny! Kick that lawyer in the Nads! w00t!
BBJ –
If the estate of JARGRAMPA has been sued – and I think that a reasonable implication from the OP of “statute of limitations runs out this week” and “now they’ve decided to sue” – then JARGRANDMA needs a lawyer. I trust we’re all in agreement on that. Now, I don’t particularly care whether it is a lawyer hired by the insurance company or a lawyer hired by JG, though the former has obvious positive qualities – namely that the insurance company will pay for it. I have no inherent distrust of insurance defense lawyers (seeing as how, for one painful year and a half, I was one).
But IMO the “hit and run” aspect of it presents a potential problem. I don’t know what JGRANPA’s insurance policy covers and what it doesn’t. It seems to me that failure to remain at the scene of an accident might negatively impact coverage. Like, say, the insurance company argues that there is no duty to defend claims arising from the leaving the scene. (I don’t know what those claims might be because I don’t know the facts of this situation, and lawyers are very imaginative.) Or that you, the insured, have a duty to cooperate in the accident investigation and/or report the accident promptly in order to avoid voiding your coverage, which you did not do. These are total hypotheticals because I don’t know what JARGRAMPS policy provided, or what the law is in JARGRAMP’s state.
But the point is – neither does JARGRANNY. The result to be most devoutly avoided is the insurance company leaving her in the lurch, with a lawsuit on her hands. This may be, as BBJ says, unlikely, but it is certainly possible. So she must notify the insurance company, in order to trigger their duty to defend, and then she should talk to a lawyer (either theirs or someone else) in order to determine whether the policy terms cover defense of this case by the insurance company, in light of the facts presented.
But when there is a question regarding coverage, as there is here, it would be most unwise, VUNDERBOB, to just assume the insurance company will take care you. Not if they don’t have to, they won’t.
Jodi, yes I agree with you–get a lawyer. But, even if the insurance company is going to try to deny coverage, it should provide a defense with a reservation of rights. Most insurance companies I’ve worked for: State Farm, Lancer, Farmers etc… are so scared of a bad faith suit they provide a defense.
But, do get a copy of JARGRANDPA’s policy and see if it states what they can deny coverage for.
Maybe it is my mood or something, but this made me laugh out loud. Thanks for improving my day.
As to the OP…
I know almost nothing about any of this, except for one thing. I was in a serious accident ten years ago, and my insurance company told me not to sign ANYTHING from the “at fault” drivers insurance company without showing it to them first. Including the check reimbursing me for my totalled car. They told me that signing that check was the legal equivilant of “settling” and I would have no further recourse in re: that part of the settlement. So, wouldn’t the fact that the ratfinks** who are bullying your gram signed their check in settlement of the accident mean that they had signed a release, preventing them from being ABLE to sue gram civilly? ( And yes, I understand that it was the insurance company who called. But they were representing the ratfinks, and behaved ratfinkly themselves, and they obviously all live under a rock in the sewer. People who prey on the elderly make me livid.)
As I said, I know nothing. But that was my understanding in my situation.
**I can’t think of anything bad enough to call a person who would phone an elderly woman, find out that she is in grief for her husband…the person actually involved in the incident, and suggest she was going to lose her house unless she was willing to “play ball” with them. And that is essentially what they did. Ratfink will have to do, but it isn’t even remotely bad enough.
This is the Pit. You’re allowed to say “double ratfink.”
As to the hit-and-run angle, I reread the OP, which said:
Now, that’s ambiguous about whether Grampa stopped after the collision, exchanged papers, but left before officialdom descended upon the scene, or simply kept going after the hit. If the former, he (and now his estate, thus Grandma) would not be out of the legal woods, but would be in a better position than if he hadn’t stopped at all. At least, that’s the opinion of this nonattorney who’s read extensively in the law.
My only other comment would be:
SLIME-SUCKING ZOMBIE-FUCKING COPROPHAGIC GHOUL!!!
Bump
Jarbabyj, got any updated for us?
Additional info is of great intrest.
fnord