A 42 year old woman (wife of a police officer) was driving her SUV when she struck and killed a teenager who was one of three riding their bicycles.
She is now suing the boys family for $1.35 million because she says the boy was an incompetent bicycle rider and the accident was his fault.
It seems there are many facts about this case that make it look like this woman is in the wrong here but there are also facts that suggest the boys’ family is in the wrong here.
The thing that bothered me was that the woman’s husband (who is a police officer) was driving behind her and witnessed the accident. But he arranged for the woman to leave the scene before anyone else left the scene and she was never given any breathalyzer test or roadside test to see if she had been drinking. I get the impression that she got special treatment because she is married to a cop.
The other thing that is very strange is that apparently, the boys’ family has no insurance and there is no money available. So even if she wins this lawsuit, there is no money for her to get.
Anyway, like I say, this is a very complicated accident and many people are claiming that one side or the other is at fault here.
I’m not at all certain who is right or who is wrong. But it may take a few more days or weeks for more facts to become known before it becomes more clear which side is in the wrong.
The other OP is more about the lawsuit against the dead victim, which I guess the OP thought was a good fit for the Pit. The moderators might decide that the two threads are distinct enough to remain separate or might combine them. I could see the decision going either way.
You missed an important step in the chain of events. The dead teenager’s family filed a lawsuit against the driver. And then she filed her lawsuit in return. My understanding is this is actually a fairly routine practice. Somebody sues you and you countersue them. That way if both sides win a judgment, the payments cancel out.