3 ms·
Correct, that was the outcome, even though the decedent crashed INTO the Ralphs truck (so lay person might think decedent would owe Ralphs if anything), instead
by tempnow987 5y ago
Correct, that was the outcome, even though the decedent crashed INTO the Ralphs truck (so lay person might think decedent would owe Ralphs if anything), instead Ralphs was ordered to pay decedent.
This is where the law diverges from what people imagine.
- giantg2 5y agoSo what was the law that Ralph's broke? Was the rig not allowed to be parked there? There wasn't a lot of detail in the comment.
- dragonwriter 5y agoThe rig was illegally parked in an area along the freeway designated for “emergency parking only“.
- giantg2 5y agoAh, ok.
- dragonwriter 5y agoThe decedent's estate was also ordered to pay Ralph's. It's just the $4,725 in damages that Ralph's was awarded on their claim for damage to the truck was substantially less than the wrongful death award even after the latter was reduced to 10% of the damages the jury found because of Cabral’s 90% fault.