The Woodlands, TX Personal Injury Law Firms & Lawyers

The reason you have insurance is to protect you in the event that your car, or anyone driving it with your permission, is responsible for causing an accident and resulting injury. While the driver's insurance should be primary on the injury claims, if there are any, your insurance should be primary on your property damage claim. While her insurance may be willing to pay for your property damage, the reason you have insurance is to repair your vehicle when it is damaged, whether your fault or not. You have a first party contractual relationship with your carrier and as a result they must treat you fairly, while you have no such relationship with the driver's insurance. Therefore, they don't have to repair disputed damage, nor do they have to repair it in a reasonable period of time. If you pursue repairs through your own carrier, they will subrogate the amount they pay to repair your vehicle, meaning they will pursue reimbursement from the driver's carrier. Therefore, instead of dealing with a company with which you have no relationship and hence no real leverage over, you should pursue your property damage repairs through your own carrier and let them go get it from the other company. Given the accident is not your fault and your carrier will be getting reimbursement there should be no adverse effect on your premiums.

A person can sue the owner of the vehicle even if he or she was not driving the vehicle under certain circumstances. There are several legal theories under which you can sue, including, but not limited to: employment; agency; family purpose doctrine; and negligent entrustment. For the first two, employment and agency, the employer or principal is liable for the acts of their employees or agents. So, if the accident occuring while the person was working then the owner of the vehicle can be sued. The family purpose doctrine applies, generally, to family members lending out their vehicle to family members for "family purposes." The last, which you mention in your Question, is negligent entrustment. An owner of a vehicle can be sued and be held liable for lending out his or her vehicle if you can prove the following: (1) that the owner permitted the unlicensed driver to drive his or her vehicle; (2) that, at the time the owner permitted the unlicensed driver to drive the vehicle, the owner either knew, or in the exercise of reasonably care should have known, that the unlicensed driver was so inexperienced, incompetent, etc. that he or she was unable to operate the vehicle properly; and (3) that the unlicensed driver's negligence caused the accident. The issue posed in your Question is whether the owner knew or should have known that the unlicensed driver was unable to drive the vehicle properly. This issue is partially answered if you know why the driver did not have a license. Was it taken away for multiple traffic offenses? Did the person never take the driver's test? If the driver being unlicensed had to do with his or her ability to drive a car safely then you may have a claim against the owner. Relatedly, in almost all vehicle accident lawsuits, you sue the driver and/or the owner of the vehicle; you cannot not sue the insurance company. If the vehicle the unlicensed driver was insured, and the unlicensed driver had permission to drive the vehicle and was not an "excluded" driver under the policy, the owner's insurance policy should pay, up to its limits for any injuries or damages you sustained. A vehicle's insurance is primary; the driver's insurance, if any, is secondary. You may want to discuss your case with an attorney to determine more about your rights and who you can sue. Most automobile accident attorneys offer a free initial consultation so it will not cost you anything to get more information. DISCLAIMER: This response should be considered general in nature, for information purposes only and should be used only as a starting point for addressing legal questions and issues. It is based on the limited information provided and, in some instances, makes certain assumptions. It is intended only for cases involving Nebraska and Nebraska law and is not applicable to any other state or jurisdiction. The author does not warrant the accuracy or validity of the information contained within this response, and hereby disclaims any liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions. In addition, this response is not a substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor should it be considered a solicitation for additional legal advice or legal representation. If you ignore this warning and convey confidential information in a private message or comment, there is no duty to keep that information confidential or forego representation adverse to your interests. You should seek the advice of a licensed attorney in the appropriate jurisdiction to fully discuss your case. You should be aware that there are Statute of Limitations (the deadline imposed by law within which you may bring a lawsuit) as well as other requirements and/or limitations that limit the time you have to file any potential claims you may have. This response may be considered advertising in some jurisdictions under any and all applicable laws and ethical rules. The listing of any area of pr

If you have not been hired by one of the parties to testify as an expert then you do not have to attend. If either party serves you with a subpoena then you are required by the court to attend.