Sued Over a Car Accident Due to an Incorrect Police Report

[BrutusK]

My question involves an injury that occurred in the state of: Louisiana

Almost 2 years ago I was involved in a 5 car accident, I was rear-ended. I was in the front, everything else happened behind me. The front of my car has no damage. However, the police report stated.....Car 1 rear ended Car 2, Car 2 rear ended Car 3, Car 3 rear ended Car 4, Car 4 rear ended Car 5...... The police report stated I was Car #2. This was inaccurate. I was really Car #5. It was 2 separate accidents. Car 1, 2, and 3 were in an accident, and Car 4 and 5 were another accident. It just happened to be near each other. Car 4 admitted fault to hitting me and he stated it was two separate accidents in his deposition, so did I. (Police Report stated he was Car # 1).

I am being sued by Car #3.

The person who hit me was also being sued by Car # 3. However, he had minimal insurance and they settled quickly because they stated it would have cost more to defend him in this case.

After taking depositions of everyone involved in the accident, it is still very unclear to the lawyers how this accident happened. Everyone had different versions. But no one stated I hit them. I also have pictures of the damage done to my car. The rear was severely damaged, but the front was untouched. I was able to get the Police Report amended with my statement (which was not taken at the time of the accident) and the pictures were submitted into evidence. But the attorney for Car # 3 refuses to drop me from the case. My attorney is attempting a summary judgement.

How critical is a Police Report for summary judgement or a trial? What if the cop testifies and swears what he included is his report is exactly what happened? I have pictures of my car showing no damage to the front, no one stated in their deposition I hit them, the ONLY evidence I have against me is the inaccurate Police Report.

[budwad]

A police report is only hearsay evidence and is usually only allowed into evidence to question the officer's credibility or recollection of the incident. I wouldn't be too worried about it. Your attorney knows how to handle its introduction or objection into evidence.

[adjusterjack]

How critical is a Police Report for summary judgement or a trial?

It isn't. A police report is not admissible in court.

What if the cop testifies and swears what he included is his report is exactly what happened?

He isn't going to be able to testify to that because he didn't see what happened. He also won't be allowed to testify as to what the participants told him because that is hearsay. In fact, it's unlikely that the officer will testify at all.

the ONLY evidence I have against me is the inaccurate Police Report.

Then you have nothing to worry about because the police report is not evidence at all.

Car 3's attorney is likely an ambulance chaser who wants to drag this out as long as he can in the hopes of getting some go away money for his client.

With the front of your car being untouched and testimony that you were at the front of the line I'm guessing that your attorney has a good chance of being granted summary judgment and it will be all over.

Ask your attorney for a copy of his Motion for Summary Judgment. It'll make for interesting reading. No reason he shouldn't give it to you as you can just as easily get a copy from the court case file (either online or in person).

[flyingron]

If he did an investigation, noting tire marks, where the cars ended up, etc... then that is admissible. As AJ says, the police "report" isn't admissible, nor is relaying the statements of others.

[budwad]

Then wouldn't that be direct testimony from the officer rather than admissibility of the police report?

[flyingron]

Then wouldn't that be direct testimony from the officer rather than admissibility of the police report?

Yes, it would have to be direct testimony, but he asked about whether the officer could testify and I was explaining what he COULD admissibly testify to.

[BrutusK]

UPDATE:
His attorney sent his response for the Summary Judgement. He is claiming I cut off Car #1, causing him to hit both me and Car #3. I didn't I was already stopped for about 10 seconds.
Car #1 stated in his deposition he didn't hit anyone else. It was just me and him.

The problem is the positioning of the cars, everyone seemed to have different versions of the final positions of the cars in their depositions. Seemed I'm the only on who said the accident was behind me. But everyone had their own versions of what happened.

My question is, I didn't cut him off. I was already stopped for at least 10 seconds. Is there a good chance for summary judgement?

Just for clarification for this post:
Car # 1 = Person who hit me
Car # 2 = Me
Car # 3 = Person suing both of us, at first he claimed I hit him, but now he is claiming I cut off car # 1 making car # 1 hit both of us.

Thank you for the help!

[flyingron]

Summary judgments are only issued if there is compelling evidence that there's no way the other party can prevail. Obviously, your attorney is going to oppose the summary judgment. It's wishful thinking on the other attorney's part that this is going to be granted. You're not likely to get one either.

[adjusterjack]

Summary judgments are only issued if there is compelling evidence that there's no way the other party can prevail. Obviously, your attorney is going to oppose the summary judgment. It's wishful thinking on the other attorney's part that this is going to be granted. You're not likely to get one either.

Agree.

This is likely to go to trial where the truth will come out when all the participants are called to testify.

[BrutusK]

Thank you. This is so unnerving. I was already in the right lane, and I was stopped for about 10-15 seconds before I was hit. The notion that I cut off Car #1 is completely false.

Does he have to prove I cut off car #1? I mean, I just don't understand how all of a sudden the argument has changed from me hitting car #3 to me cutting off car #1 forcing car#1 to hit both cars (which he stated in his deposition, he only hit me).

Thanks for the help, I'm so nervous because I didn't do anything wrong here but I'm still being sued and I really have no idea how this is going to turn out!