For decades, New York City has followed a clear legal principle: if your vehicle gets rear-ended, the car that hit you from behind is typically at fault. This rule applies whether your vehicle was moving or completely stopped when the collision occurred. This concept stems from Vehicle and Traffic Law §1129, which requires drivers to maintain a safe following distance. The law considers factors like vehicle speed, traffic conditions, and road conditions when determining what constitutes a reasonable following distance.
In most cases, attorneys can ask the court to determine liability as a matter of law. This means the only remaining question becomes the extent of your injuries and damages, not who caused the accident.
Why Rear-End Drivers Rarely Escape Liability
The vehicle that causes a rear-end collision faces a significant burden to prove they weren’t negligent. To escape liability, the offending driver must provide a valid, non-negligent excuse for the collision.
Common excuses that courts typically reject include:
- “The car in front stopped short”
- “I didn’t see the brake lights”
- “I slipped on ice”
These explanations rarely hold up in New York courts without additional extenuating circumstances. Drivers have a legal duty to maintain safe speeds and following distances, making these excuses insufficient to avoid responsibility.
The Exception: Gonzalez-Santos v. Diaz
A recent Supreme Court case in New York County challenged this long-standing principle. In Gonzalez-Santos v. Diaz, the court departed from typical rear-end collision liability rules specifically because double parking was involved.
The plaintiff was injured when struck from behind while waiting for a parking spot on 51st Street, approximately 200 feet west of 10th Avenue. Her vehicle was double parking when the defendant’s car side-swiped three parked vehicles before colliding with her car and fleeing the scene.
Despite acknowledging that double parking to wait for parking spots is “common practice in Manhattan,” the judge was compelled to follow appellate precedent from White v. Diaz.
How Double Parking Changes Legal Liability
The White v. Diaz decision established that double parking on busy Manhattan streets creates foreseeable risks. The court ruled that “a reasonable jury could find that a rear-end collision is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of double parking for five minutes on a busy Manhattan street.”
This ruling means that these cases cannot be decided as a matter of law. Instead, liability questions must go to a jury, who will determine each party’s degree of fault.
The judge in Gonzalez-Santos noted the irony of this ruling. In more extreme cases, such as when a driver stops short because a bee flies into their car, plaintiffs still receive automatic liability determinations. Yet double parking cases require jury deliberation.
What This Means for Manhattan Drivers
If you’re involved in a rear-end collision while double parking, you may face shared liability even though you were hit from behind. Insurance companies and opposing counsel will likely argue that your double parking contributed to the accident.
This doesn’t mean you can’t recover damages. New York follows comparative negligence rules, allowing you to recover compensation even if you’re partially at fault. However, your recovery may be reduced by your percentage of fault.
Protecting Your Rights
The changing legal landscape around double parking liability makes professional legal representation crucial. An experienced Staten Island personal injury lawyer can help evaluate your case and protect your interests.
A qualified personal injury law firm will:
- Investigate the full circumstances of your accident
- Gather evidence to minimize your liability percentage
- Calculate fair compensation for your injuries and damages
Key Takeaways:
- Double parking in Manhattan can affect your legal rights in rear-end collision cases, unlike typical rear-end accidents.
- Courts may require jury trials to determine fault when double parking is involved, rather than automatic liability for the rear driver.
- You can still recover damages even with shared liability, but compensation may be reduced based on your percentage of fault.
Get Legal Help for Your Double Parking Accident
Double parking accidents involve complex liability questions that require experienced legal guidance. The evolving court decisions around double parking make it essential to work with attorneys who understand these nuances.
Can I still recover damages if I was double parking when rear-ended?
Yes, you can still recover compensation under New York’s comparative negligence rules, though your award may be reduced by your percentage of fault.
Why is double parking treated differently than other rear-end accidents?
Courts consider double parking on busy streets a foreseeable cause of accidents, requiring jury determination rather than automatic liability for the rear driver.
Should I hire a lawyer for a double parking accident case?
Yes, these cases involve complex liability issues that benefit from experienced legal representation to protect your rights and maximize recovery.
