Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default Filed Law Suit

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

    Here I go again. Helping a friend wade through this accident and a Justice Court law suit filed.

    My friends son was involved in a hit and run accident with injury and transported to the hospital. His vehicle was totaled and only had liability. Another vehicle hit sustained minor damage. The at fault driver fled leaving the vehicle at the scene. A responding officer ran the VIN/Plate and the registration was expired no insurance information found in the vehicle. However, an officer found a bank statement in the vehicle showing the name and address within a short distance from the accident location. This person earlier in the morning reported the vehicle stolen. An unknown person/witness stated the person fleeing the accident stated in Spanish he would be back walking in the direction where the person reported the vehicle stolen. The driver never returned. One of the officer's went to the address of the person who reported the vehicle stolen which matched the name on the bank statement. This person showed the officer a bill of sale and stated the only key for the vehicle was in possession of his mechanic who lives in Mexico. There were no signs of forced entry, hot wiring or any ignition key damage. However, this guy failed to take title to the vehicle into his name. The vehicle was still titled and registered to another person. The vehicle was definitely not insured by either the buyer or the seller owner. Filed a suit naming the buyer with the bill of sale and the actual titled owner. Applied for a default but both parties filed meaningless answer's. The buyer provides an exhibit of the front of the title with his answer. The titled owner attaches the back of a title showing a notarized backside of a title. Kinda weird why neither copied and attached front and back as an exhibit. My friend on behalf of his son called the buyer which he said he didn't title and register the vehicle because of mechanical problems and being unable to pass emission's testing. He's lying because the emission test record's shows the last time the vehicle tested and passed was in 2016. Neither party is attempting to settle the matter. We believe the titled owner sold the vehicle in good faith and properly had the title notarized and provided the buyer with a bill of sale unknown if she has a copy of the bill sale. She failed to notify MVD of the sale. We don't believe she is liable but still named her. On the other hand the buyer failed to take title but he could have obtained temporary drive permit's to drive the vehicle and could have had liability insurance on the vehicle.

    So, right now at this point my friends son has to submit his disclosure statement. Both were sued for the maximum amount. $10,000.00 He now only wants to recover the market value of the vehicle nothing for injury or medical bills.

    So, the question: Is it proper or improper for my friends son to send a letter to the buyer requesting or proposing a settlement in an amount to cover the loss of his vehicle in order to settle without him having to go further through the court process.

    Thanks again for the response.

    DDSA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Filed Law Suit

    Yur friend's son can write all the letters he wants.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    18,340

    Default Re: Filed Law Suit

    Quote Quoting DDSA
    View Post

    Is it proper or improper for my friends son to send a letter to the buyer requesting or proposing a settlement in an amount to cover the loss of his vehicle in order to settle without him having to go further through the court process.
    There is nothing improper about sending the letter offering to settle for an amount less than the amount sued for.

    To that end your son should read Rule 68 of AZ Rules of Civil Procedure:

    https://govt.westlaw.com/azrules/Doc...a=(sc.Default)

    It is customary to cite the rule when making the offer so that the offeree is aware of the risk of rejecting the offer.

    Now, if I am reading it correctly, the seller did not own the vehicle at the time of the accident and the buyer was not the driver that caused the accident and the buyer had reported the vehicle stolen earlier that day prior to the accident.

    If that's correct then the title issue is irrelevant. The seller has documentation of the sale and the buyer has a police report of the theft. That the buyer didn't title the vehicle nor buy insurance on it has nothing to do with determining if the buyer is responsible for the accident.

    The seller certainly isn't.

    To prove that the buyer was responsible for the accident requires proof that the buyer negligently entrusted the vehicle to the driver.

    Arizona recognizes a cause of action for negligent entrustment as set forth in Restatement (Second) of Torts (Restatement Second) § 390 (1965), which provides:

    One who supplies directly or through a third person a chattel for the use of another whom the supplier knows or has reason to know to be likely because of his youth, inexperience, or otherwise, to use it in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical harm to himself and others whom the supplier should expect to share in or be endangered by its use, is subject to liability for physical harm resulting to them.

    the elements of an Arizona common law negligent entrustment claim are:

    (1) "that Defendant owned or controlled a vehicle"; (2) "Defendant gave the driver permission to operate a vehicle"; (3) "the driver, by virtue of his physical or mental condition, was incompetent to drive safely"; (4) "the Defendant knew or should have known that the driver, by virtue of his physical or mental condition, was incompetent to drive safely"; (5) "causation"; and (6) "damages."
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...=en&as_sdt=4,3

    That the car was stolen would appear to eliminate any liability on the part of the buyer unless you can first prove that the theft report is a fake and then prove the elements of negligent entrustment.

    Here's something else that your son needs to understand. In Arizona the Justice Courts are not small claims courts. For claims from $3501 to $10,000 the Justice Courts share jurisdiction with the Superior Courts and all of the Rules of Civil Procedure apply including rules of evidence.

    https://govt.westlaw.com/azrules/Bro...a=(sc.Default)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Filed Law Suit

    Quote Quoting DDSA
    View Post
    Filed a suit naming the buyer with the bill of sale and the actual titled owner. Applied for a default but both parties filed meaningless answer's.
    The rules don't require much for an answer. All the defendant is required to do is state whether he/she affirms or denies each fact stated in the plaintiff's complaint. The defendant does not have to lay out a detailed explanation of his/her defense in the answer. So most answers simply state "affirm", "deny", or "deny for lack of information" in response to each allegation in the complaint.

    Quote Quoting Harold99
    View Post
    So, the question: Is it proper or improper for my friends son to send a letter to the buyer requesting or proposing a settlement in an amount to cover the loss of his vehicle in order to settle without him having to go further through the court process.
    If the buyer is represented by an attorney then the proper thing to do is for the son's lawyer (if he has one, but it sounds like he doesn't) or the son send the settlement offer to the buyer's attorney. The buyer's attorney then must share the offer with his/her client for a decision on whether to take the offer or not. If the buyer is not represented by an attorney then the offer may go directly to the buyer.

    The son has to prove who it was that was driving the other car at the time of the accident. If the buyer succeeds in convincing the jury (or judge, if there is no jury) that the car was stolen before the accident then the son will lose because the jury/judge will believe the buyer didn't cause the accident.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,745

    Default Re: Filed Law Suit

    Quote Quoting DDSA
    View Post
    Filed a suit naming the buyer with the bill of sale and the actual titled owner. Applied for a default but both parties filed meaningless answer's.
    FYI, you don't need an apostrophe just because a word ends in "s". Why do you consider the answers to be "meaningless"?


    Quote Quoting DDSA
    View Post
    So, the question: Is it proper or improper for my friends son to send a letter to the buyer requesting or proposing a settlement in an amount to cover the loss of his vehicle in order to settle without him having to go further through the court process.
    Nothing improper about that. It's one of the most common things that happens in just about every civil lawsuit.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    157

    Default Re: Filed Law Suit

    Some questions if you please.

    1. Why is it that in reading your much detailed post one is at a loss to find any mention of the timeline relevant to the two critical episodes; to-wit: Episode #1 the time of the accident and episode #2 the time the vehicle was reported as stolen?

    Do you know of any incidents wherein a vehicle has been falsely reported as being stolen prior to its involvement in an accident or criminal enterprise?

    2. Are we justified in assuming that your "friend's son" is of legal age and that he is the real party interest in the pending lawsuit? The term "real party interest" to mean that he is the sole legal owner of the vehicle that is the subject for the claim of damages.

    3. Are you licensed to practice law in the State of Arizona?

    4. Which of "you all" is responsible for naming the seller of the other vehicle as a party defendant in face of "you all's" admission that "We don't believe she is liable . . ?!

    5. Are any of "you all" familiar with Rule 11 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure * imposing sanctions for the filing of frivolous lawsuits such as without reasonable grounds putting people to the task of defending spurious claims. I deem it of far greater importance and consequence to "you all' than submitting useless offers of settlement. If you can't see how such offers would be of insignificant value in this instance, ask and I'll explain.

    [*]https://govt.westlaw.com/azrules/Doc...onType=Default

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Medical Malpractice: I Had a Lawyer He Filed My Suit. then He Quit
    By pettals in forum Malpractice Law
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-18-2014, 04:25 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 09:29 AM
  3. Bankruptcy Issues: Credit Card Co. Filed Judgement Suit, What Can I Do
    By shadow41 in forum Bankruptcy Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-20-2008, 10:54 AM
  4. Rent and Utilities: Landlord Filed A Suit Against Me For Not Paying Rent
    By gekko in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 10:41 AM
  5. Debt Collectors: Suit Filed For Credit Card Debt
    By BS9876 in forum Debts and Collections
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-28-2006, 04:50 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources