In this case, the injured spouse was not aware of the car purchase by her husband and lack of liability coverage she was convinced that the car was given to her husband at work for business-related trips. Hilmar Unified School District (2008) 166 Cal. Similar to the scenario set out above, where unbeknownst to the unsuspecting spouse, the other spouse failed to buy liability insurance, in a real case decided by California Appellate Court, it was determined that the unknowing spouse may recover noneconomic damages for her injuries. Below is a brief list of exceptions that may apply to permit recovery despite Prop 213.Ī) Innocent Spouse May still Recover Noneconomic Damages in An Automobile Accident due to her Injuries. ![]() At Injury Justice Law Firm, LLP, our team of experienced attorneys will examine each case based on its facts and may find an applicable exception in the law, which may still permit the uninsured motorist to recover fully for his or her injuries. Since each case is different and turns on its facts, with the help of an experienced personal injury attorney, an uninsured motorist may still be able to recover. However, a spouse who did not know that the car was uninsured at the time of the accident, may still recover noneconomic damages even though the automobile had been acquired during the marriage and was deemed a community property asset. So, for instance, if a spouse who purchased the vehicle but failed to obtain liability insurance on the vehicle was driving and the other spouse was a passenger, the passenger spouse may be deemed an owner of the vehicle under community property laws and therefore unable to seek compensation for pain and suffering and other non-economic damages. In California, spouses automatically acquire an ownership interest in an automobile that is acquired by the other spouse during marriage by the virtue of applicable California community property laws. Effect of California Community Property Law on Prop 213 The bottom line is that, although driven by someone else, if the owner of the vehicle did not carry valid liability insurance for his/her vehicle at the time of the accident, he/she would not be able to recover for noneconomic damages even though he/she was merely a passenger. So, if the injured party was also the owner of an automobile that was involved in a collision, the penalty against recovering certain damages would apply to the injured party simply because of being an owner. Nevertheless, what happens if the owner of the uninsured vehicle, who has been also the passenger in the same vehicle at the time of the accident, attempts to recover against any at-fault parties involved? Then, his/her recovery may be also limited simply by the passenger being the owner of the uninsured vehicle as well. As has been described above, it is clear that if the driver is also the owner of the uninsured vehicle at the time of the accident, then his/her recovery for noneconomic damages may be barred. Prop 213 applies to both uninsured drivers and owners of the uninsured automobile(s). Who is Considered An Uninsured Motorist Under Prop 213? Therefore, uninsured motorist's recovery is limited to economic damages, i.e., compensation for out-of-pocket expenses, which he/she has incurred or may incur in the future as a result of the accident, i.e., medical bills, lost wages, repairs for physical damage to an automobile, future lost wages, and/or future medical bills. ![]() Noneconomic damages are damages, which cannot be easily measured or quantified and primarily consist of reimbursement for pain and suffering, loss of companionship, loss of consortium (love of a spouse), and/or even disfigurement. Under Civil Code Section 3333.4, if the driver of the vehicle or the owner of a car involved in a car accident, did not carry a valid liability auto insurance at the time of the accident, California law prohibits such uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages. In 1996, the California legislature passed Proposition 213, which was mainly codified under California Civil Code Section 3333.4 (and is still commonly referred to as Prop 213) and was meant to punish people who did not have car insurance by creating certain penalties for the uninsured driver and owner of the vehicle. Information About California Proposition 213 ![]() However, most of the injured people do not realize that if they were uninsured at the time of the accident, their potential recovery for injuries may be limited, even if they are completely not at fault for the accident. Impact of Prop 213 on Uninsured Car Accident VictimsĪt Injury Justice Law Firm, we frequently receive calls from potential clients who sustained injuries in car accidents due to no fault of their own.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |