(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Accident question

J

John S-B

Well-known Member
Went on an emergency run yesterday, aqquaintance of ours was traveling on a two lane state route (Ohio). On a narrow section on a curve, she met a tractor pulling a planter coming in the opposite direction. Speed limit is 45 there. The road curves at about a 30 degree angle to the right and drops sharply in the direction she was traveling, it's kind of a blind curve. The tractor was headed up the hill and the planter was left of center. She went to the right to avoid a collision and caught the berm and over corrected losing control. She then went left of center and struck an Explorer head on that was behind the tractor. Both vehicles had heavy damage, but only very minor injuries luckily. Her car is totaled as it's older and the airbag deployed, the SUV is newer and will probably be repaired.
Is the tractor driver at fault here? He was gone when we got there, don't know if he even stopped. Seems to me he is a least partially to blame since he was left of center. The SUV driver was the one that told us that the planter was left of center. I don't know if any citations were given.
 
the tractor driver was guilty of being left of center, thats all, the tractor and planter did not cause the accident, the accident was caused by driver number 1's failure to maintain control of the vehicle during emergency conditions swerving then recovering are both skills that must be mastered
 
In Ohio, if you do anything to cause another driver to lose control, you are at fault. Even if there is no contact between your vehicle and the other.

First hand experience talking here.
 
Not knowing Ohio's laws in regards to farming, I really can't answer that one. The farm equipment was a "Non-Contact" vehicle. As Eric said, he may be guilty of driving Left Of Center, but again I'm not sure of laws there, and how they relate to various State roads and who has the Right of Way. In Texas, on 99% of the Farm to Market and Ranch to Market Roads, the farmers and ranchers have the ROW. If cattle get out, they can be called to pen them, but they don't always come out. If you hit one of their animals, you are at fault. These are asphalt roads maintained by the State, and set up for moving produce and livestock to and from market, hence the names. There are a few of them that are not "exempt", but they are in major metro areas, which once were mostly farm or ranch property. Equipment used by farmers and ranchers also are not usually at fault, as long as the have the required safety equipment on the equipment. My son bought a brand new Chevy 1 ton Dualie, and had been here to visit. As he was getting ready to leave, I told him to take the main highways and stay off the FM roads. He didn't... He hit a LARGE Black bull. his 2 week old truck had several thousand dollars of damage to it. He and his bride were OK though. His Mom who is in a law firm in Austin was going to sue on behalf of our son. I told her she couldn't, but she did a bunch of work and research anyway. She discovered her ex-husband the Cop was right again..... Walt's insurance paid for everything though, and his truck was good as new. Now, a civil suit on the other hand up there might be viable to recover losses if they can find the driver or owner of the equipment, just not here....
 
in new york the owner of livestock is at fault if they get loose.Funny thing is horses are not considered livestock and then the driver that hits them is at fault. bill m.
 
I'll say it's her fault.

Here in New York the law says . . . #1 farm vehicles have the right-of-way, and #2 all automobile drivers are to be in full control of their vechiles and drive as per road conditions. Posted speed limit are just that - max limits only when road conditions allow. If you come to a "blind curve", you're supposed to slow down enough so you can stop safely, if needed.

Are these laws actually enforced? I doubt it.

I had a lady tailgating me, who finally rammed into me at a red light. The cop refused to give her a ticket, even though I felt quite different.

We also had a guy's parked SUV roll out of his driveway this summmer (with nobody in it), go across the road and kill a woman who was working in her garden. Again NO tickets given. Yet, the laws says - a car parked MUST have the parking brake on, trans in gear or park, and wheels cut over at a sharp angle.
 
A minor correction ... in TX you are liable for hitting livestock on the highway only if you are in an open range county ... there are not many of these left. SD's respond to livestock on the highway as they represent a severe traffic hazard.

Just because it is an FM or RR in Texas does not mean that the farmer or rancher has the right of way. There is a greater likelihood of coming across them.

When on the highways, farm equipment does have a certain amount of latitude, but they are not exempt from all traffic laws.

They are exempt from high/wide load permits and vehicle registration. However, many of the traffic laws still apply. Stopping at the scene of an accident is one of them.

Just because they are an SMV and may be considered a wide load, they are required to yield to oncoming traffic (i.e., they cannot block the oncoming lane) and they cannot cross a solid yellow line.

That being said, the tractor driver in my opinion is in serious trouble having not only crossed a solid yellow line but also left the scene of an accident.

pkurilecz
 
Crash. The result of three drivers being on the same road at the same time... If ANY of the three had used an extra amp of brain power; could this crash been avoided???

Sadly, the hazardous tractor didn't have an escort.. does he legally need one??; probably not..sad

The suv was legally following the hazardous tractor; OK ,,, how close and WHY ??

The car lost control.. not good at all.


Defensive driving has it's merits......you can only drive your own vehicle.....
 
I was involved in and accident many years ago where I was the tractor driver. I was crossing a small bridges at a corner. A car came flying around the corner and hit me head on. I was indeed taking up the entire bridge and there was no way for the car to avoid me. The county sheriff said right there at the accident that any peace of farm equipment had the right away in this situation. This was in KS back about 1974. The car driver's insurance company tried to prove I was at fault but lost the case.
 
Why do you think the farmer was not there when the law showed up??? If he was left of center then he is liable for causing the accident. A farm equipment accident in Ohio that killed a State congressman"s son is why all equipment has extremity lighting now. If I was your friend I would try to find out who the farmer is and let her lawyer FIND out how good of insurance that farmer has!!!

WHY AM I MAD ABOUT THIS??? I Am a farmer and move a lot of wide equipment. I DO pull over to yield to traffic. Too many of the farmers around here think they are GOD and don"t have to yield to no one. They pay TAXES so the he!! with everyone else. Thanksgiving Day had to follow a a tractor and wagon for two miles as the Woman driving it would not use the berm,empty wagon too. Too much traffic to pass. Now the berm is twelve feet wide , graveled and maintained for farm traffic. I hear the farmers brag at the coffee shop about how they are not going to use the berm BECAUSE they pay taxes too and have the "Right" to use the pavement too. Have a neighbor that moves his combine with a thirty-five foot head. Does not even own a header trailer. Says it is the other people"s problem IF HE is blocking traffic.

I am waiting for enough non farm people to get fed up with that attitude and then watch as farmers have to have license and are limited in width. Some of the North east states are already limiting how wide farm equipment can be and not need escorts/lights.

Have family in Southern Ohio, Brown County. The sheriff has started writing tickets for overloaded weight on grain carts and wagons. They are destroying the paved county road. Breaking the shoulders off loading trucks setting in the road way.

It only takes a few idiots to make life hard on us all. I try to respect my fellow travelers. A small law change that makes us more liable would make life rough.
 
I'd agree that leaving the scene of an accident is a serious offence. I think he'd be at fault if part of his equipment was on the wrong side of the road, especially on a blind corner or a hill where there was restricted visibility. There's only so much the other driver can do in a split second emergency situation. The farmer should have had a pilot truck to warn other drivers. Dave
 
It's an unfortunate accident, but it's her fault. You have to move at a speed that allows you to maintain control of your vehicle. No if's, and's or but's about it. Meeting a slow moving tractor or even worse - a moped in a bad curve is dangerous. An experenced defensive driver knows that a sharp curve you can't see through alway's poses a danger and adjusts their speed accordingly to avoid a potential accident. It's just common sense.

Safe Defensive driving isn't popular in today's world. Seems like everyone is in a hurry and want's to push the envelope. If there's an accident it's ok as long as someone else is blamed. The blame game doesn't help someone whos injured or dead one bit. People are Stupid!JMO
 
Don"t know the answer here, but thought I"d be a smart a*s and say that the answers to this post read like the answers on a multiple choice question for a driver"s license.
 
No farmer that has large machinery would think the way you just wrote. Prices were up this year but in years past it took many acres to show a profit. Volume planting and harvesting takes large machinery which takes up more than just one lane of traffic. If you plan on eating in the future you have to take into account other than interstate roads you have farm to market roads. If the up in arms stay out of my way high speed no farm masses want the machinery out of their way I suggest they figure out a way to eat with out the farmer.
 
It's all her fault.

You'll never convince me while driving at 45mph in todays cars with anti-lock brakes that she couldn't slow down enough to control her vehicle to avoid this problem or to make it a minor fender bender at the most.

Just because you have the right of way doesn't mean you can drive wreckless.

T_Bone
 
The tractor driver is not at fault because your friend didn't hit him. She is at fault because she lost control and caused another crash. Had she hit the tractor/equipment that was left of center if it were on coming, the tractor driver would be at fault. That's not to say a skilled lawyer couldn't track the farmer down and file a sucessfull civil action though.
Maybe it's different from state to state, in Iowa farm equipment is required to yield half of the roadway period. If your livestock gets out and is on the road and gets hit, you're liable for damage.
My opinion is there is no excuse for not having perimeter lighting on equipment that is being operated on the road afer dark.
 
Kinda sounds like several minds are made up, without all the facts being totally there....

Skewer the farmer, they are always to blame.....


We don't know that he was left of the line, one person on scene mentioned it.

Many states are 'no fault' type & assingn partial blame to all parties involved.

Clearly driving so as to loose control of the car by driving off the edge of the road, the car driver carries much of the blame for the wreck. You need to drive so you have control of your vehicle.

It's possible the tractor driver shares in the blame, if he was driving across the line & outside the width & lighting and flag vehicle rules for your state. Also could be issues with leaving the scene of an accident, tho with a large vehicle and no one hurt, one would want to get off of such a dangerous area to keep from causing more acciedents.

That doesn't absolve the car driver for driving so wrecklessly (in the eyes of the law) from being at fault for not having control of her vehicle.

If the speed limit was 45 mph to begin with, one shouldn't be losing control of a vehicle for going onto the shoulder. That could indicate the state itself is at fault, if the car driver wasn't speeding (hmmm????) and not maintaining the road properly.

In short, if one wants to blame someone legally, there are many possiblities and many lawyers can get rich coming to a legal decision.

As to who actually is at fault, one would need to be there to see what happened; sounds like the car driver may have been traveling too fast or not attentive enough for the situation, and the tractor driver might have set up an issue. We only have 'hersay' to figure out which one was 'more' or 'totally' at fault, so we wouldn't know. With what is presented, it would seem pretty clear the gal in the car is partially or more at falt for not maintaining control of her vehicle.

--->Paul
 
You nailed it JD Seller, the same thing goes on around my neck of the woods. We have custom manure haulers that own the road ways, and think ---look out because we got to get these pits empty. I know of four different deals where someone took the ditch because the big spreaders took to the center of the road coming over a hill.

The sherrifs office gets lots of complaints, and give them a talking to, but it wears off real fast. No one has been injured, and we kinda can tell by the road pattern that they are hauling, so we take extra care. It makes no differance who is to blame in a accident if someone is killed or disabled.

There is little question that laws will be made to control the farmer, and it is all because of a few.

I do construction work, and have to make certian all the licences, and permits are in order, and my farmer friends fall between the cracks in the laws. Often, it is cheaper for me to hire a farmer to pull a wide load, than to waste time getting permits.

Our local court house can for certian tell me what I can not do, but when it comes to how to do it within the law?? Well --not so much.
 
John, I try to give the best free unresearched advise I can here, but your question simply CAN NOT be answered here on the net (sure you can get plenty of "opinions", lay or professional) by lay persons or attorneys. The law of torts is very complicated and different states have different laws.

1) Some states have legal doctrines such as Comparative Fault i.e. the farmer may bear some liability and the car driver may, likewise, bear some degree, how much each ONLY A COURT CAN LEGALLY DECIDE (NO ONE here) after hearing evidence, determining facts and applying that states laws to the facts as determined.

2) Some states have a legal doctrine of "Last Clear Chance" which means something like if a driver had a clear last chance of avoiding ther accident (had they operated in a safe and reasonable manner) even if the other driver was otherwise at fault or in violation of certain traffic laws, that driver bears some degree of liability. Several fact findings have to be made there, by a jury NONE of us here.

CRUCIAL FACTS which are relevant; How far over left was the farmer??????? (way over or just a foot makes a hugeeeeeeeeee legal difference). Could the car driver have avoided the accident using reasonable care UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES.......Was the car dfiver operating at safe speed UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES........Could the car driver had avoided the accident EVEN IF the farmer was left of center..... PLUS PLENTY MORE FACTS WHICH WE DONT KNOW NOR CAN WE DECIDE, THE LAW REQUIRES A COURT TO DO THAT NONE OF US HERE ARE QUALIFIED.

SOOOOOOOOOOO the correct answer here can only be MAYBE as there are far too may variables and unknowns and facts must be determined and those facts applied to the laws of the state.

MY BEST FREE LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ADVICE IS TO CONSULT A LOCAL ATTORNEY WHO PRACTICES TORT LAW as no opinions here pull much weight in a Court and this is too serious of a matter to hang your hat on tractor chat board advice.

A basic Tort Doctrine: Defendant has a duty NOT to expose the Plaintiff to a reasonably forseeable risk of injury,,,,,,,Now apply that law to the facts in your state, once determined by a jury NOW THERES THE ANSWER YOU ASKED FOR

God Bless yall n hope you had a good Thanksgiving

John T BSEE, JD Country Lawyer in Indiana
 
I agree. Most farmers have common sense when moving machinery but not all. I've drove behind a swather a few times just to warn other traffic and even went ahead to see if it was clear. If there was a blind corner, the farmer should have taken the necessary precautions to warn possible traffic coming the other direction. How is someone driving the other direction supposed to know there's oversize equipment around a corner? Sadly, I think some people have the mentality that "I'm bigger than you are, so I have the right of way". Whenever large equipment is hauled by trucks they take all the precautions needed. Why shouldn't farmers have to do the same thing? Dave
 
There are lots of variables. How wide is the road, is there a shoulder, was it wet or soft, what was the visibilty, where there lights or reflectors on the widest part of the machinery etc.? Didn't have to be wreckless driving. In the right conditions you can lose control of a car at 5 MPH. Even though the farmer wasn't hit, he shouldn't have left the scene. He is at least partly to blame. Dave
 
Dave, it certainly wasn't "wreckless" driving, but it does appear to be reckless driving :~) Paul
 
Only the best lawyer and/or law firm will win this one, and that never implies that it is based on the sum total of actual facts or reality.
It is a real shame but the same greed and lack of respect that has weakened our country is also has at work within our laws. It is not so much about the facts and who is at fault, but the perception that a bunch of word smith lawyers can bestow upon a jury.
Just saw a case where a guy shot a police officer dead in cold blood. He had time to think about shooting or retreating, his life was not in danger, etc.
The defense came up with this emotional driven facet to the case that it had to be proven beyond resonable doubt that it was premeditated. (Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being ((also known as murder)) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.)
There is very clear dash cam video of the murder, shows that the victem did not have his piece drawn, etc.
The "correctly" picked jury came up short of unanimous on the death penatly. So now, our tax money has one more loser to keep up until natural death takes him out of here.
The is not justice, it is law driven by pure capitalism.
Foot note, the murder's family had money so they had the $$$ to get a crack shot law firm.
 
I think they are both at fault. Let the courts figure it out. Anyways, a friend of mine (who leased 1100 acres of soybean and wheat ground) and I were moving two 760 MF combines down a two lane highway and a man in a Cadillac wanted by. We always pulled over at the first oportunity. Eventually, he swerved around my friend's combine and slammed on the brakes to make a point. My buddy jerked back on the hydro and when he had gotten slowed a bit he shoved it forward and kissed the back of that Caddy. The dude took off in a hurry then. I guess he didn't want to argue with the big ol' rice tires. It is a pain to move big stuff if you don't have a lead car.
 
I think they are both at fault. Let the courts figure it out. Anyways, a friend of mine (who leased 1100 acres of soybean and wheat ground) and I were moving two 760 MF combines down a two lane highway and a man in a Cadillac wanted by. We always pulled over at the first oportunity. Eventually, he swerved around my friend's combine and slammed on the brakes to make a point. My buddy jerked back on the hydro and when he had gotten slowed a bit he shoved it forward and kissed the back of that Caddy. The dude took off in a hurry then. I guess he didn't want to argue with the big ol' rice tires. It is a pain to move big stuff if you don't have a lead car.
 
Not sure when this law was changed about Texas, but I will look into it. Last I had been updated, we did not ticket farmers/ranchers, and they had ROW on the FM and RM roads. They still must exercise due diligence, as anyone else would, by not intensionally causing injury or destruction, as they would any place else. I know many farmers are afraid someone will try to get them in court over the livestock, and they have to pay out for an attorney, and decline ownership if they can. Have not been witness in court to any who tried to recover damages for the loss of livestock though. The Constables are the one's who are "supposed" to take the livestock calls, and many do. The S.O. also is tasked with it, but try to pass it off to a Constable whether he is full time or part time. We had a tractor crossing the Brazos River with a large tandem disc on back, and took up the entire roadway on the bridge. A car traveling the opposite direction passed 5 cars, tried to swerve to miss the tractor, hit the side of the bridge and bounced into the disc, killing the driver in the car. The tractor operator was not ticketed, even though he was in both lanes. He had his flashing amber lights on, and had a truck behind him with flashers on. The wife of the fatality, came back, and tried to sue everyone involved down to the manufacturer of the tires and hoses on the disc. She got NOTHING, and this was on U.S. 79. Unless DPS has started telling the Troops to ticket them (I would think under an admin order), I am not familiar with ticketing the farmers and ranchers on FM/RM roads here. I've spent over 25 years so far as a Texas Peace Officer... But I could be wrong, gonna check.
 
If it goes to court and the attorneys get hold of it and the planter was actually left of center, the farmer's in trouble. It won't matter if he's agriculture or not, he was left of center without an escort in front and behind him. Attorneys get down to the nitty gritty and they will find some little known clause in the law book.

This was just a property damage accident so it probably won't get too carried away.

I'm acquainted with two farmers who were involved with a death accident separately where both of these farmers were over center. One was pulling a grain drill that was a little left of center and was hit by a drunk who was killed. The other owned a semi that swung just a little over the left line to make a right turn. The driver behind him tried to pass him on the right shoulder while he was making the right turn. The person passing was killed. Both farmers had flashing lights/ turn signals working. Both farmers lost their farms when the families of the deceased sued them. Makes me mad just to think about it.
 
There was a case here that just went to court. A farmer was on the road after sunset with a CIH 9180 equipped with triples, pulling a 62' field cultivator (20'+ folded up) without lights on the equipment.
A driver in a Honda collided with the equipment head on and was killed.
The farmer pled guitly to reckless driving and was fined $300.
 
I don't know who is at fault here so the only thing is to let the three ins. co. fight it out. On another note I think people that bad mouth a farmer (that feeds them)with there mouth full is (excuse my people skills)one STUPID person.
 
This crash happened in my neighborhood. Combine width was ok with shoulder and one lane but when he approached the bridge he needed both lanes and of course had no shoulder. The van went around all the stopped cars and hit him. But, the header should have been removed for transport. Also was moving it at approx 5:30 PM on a friday evening during rush with no warning vehicle ahead. Surprisingly the injuries were not serious, but could have been avoided. I don't know the legal outcome. I hope the pic was attached.
http://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af329/camping5/large_mks_combinecrash2.jpg[/IMG]]Untitled URL Link
 
(quoted from post at 13:23:05 11/28/10) There was a case here that just went to court. A farmer was on the road after sunset with a CIH 9180 equipped with triples, pulling a 62' field cultivator (20'+ folded up) without lights on the equipment.
A driver in a Honda collided with the equipment head on and was killed.
The farmer pled guitly to reckless driving and was fined $300.
Click to expand...

Could there have still been a civil suit after the fact?
As we have seen with OJ and the rest,being found innocent doesn't always stop someone from going after your money.
 
The SUV driver was just behing the farm equipment because it was not safe to pass, he had no affiliation with either the tractor or the car driver.
 
Anybody can sue anybody for anything, but I'm not trying to sue anybody, I'm just interested in the legalities of the situation.
 
My understanding is that in TX, a farmer who is moving a piece of equipment from one farm location to another farm location is exempt from obtaining high/wide load permits.

If the equipment is wide, you are required to yield to it just as one is required to yield to a permitted wide load.

That being said, trying to cross a bridge where the equipment takes up the whole width without holding opposing traffic until the equipment crosses does seem to be a very poor and unwise decision.

All I can say is that when I transport equipment from one location to the other, I am so glad to be off the road.

When I move wide equipment, I get my neighbors to help me, especially on the narrow bridges.

All in all a very bad situation and I am so glad not to be in their shoes.

pkurilecz
 
The section of road this happened on is kind of treacherous, even at the posted speed. There's not much room on either side, the side the car was on has a guard rail so she had something to hit on both sides. The guy who got hit stated the planter was left of center, so I have no doubt that the tractor was. There's not any good way to go south in this area with farm equipment so I can see why he was on this particular road.
 
John, the over width tractor is a "dangerous situation" in itself when going down that road..

I would give myself lots of "extra room" and keep a safe distance from a "dangerous situation", especially on hills and curves.... unfortunately, the suv driver did not share this thought...
 
Thats why we should all pay insurance. They all have claims adjusters attornies to sort this stuff out. State law also has a huge affect. I can tell you how it reads in Kentucky and have been on both sides of civil litigation, and have been an expert witness on several occassions for agricultural stuff for plaintiffs and defendants. Doesnt mean beans in this case. My s.o. is a claims adjuster, her take on whats here is the farmer isnt at fault. The drivers over correction was the cause based on the information here. That means the driver failed to maintain control of her vehicle. The most crucial piece of information is how the law enforcement officer wrote it up. Just hope she had more than minimum limits of coverage.

As a side note, I can not understand how anybody loses anything like a farm unles they are dreadfully under insured. I know it happens, people with a half million dollar house or farm thats paid for and they are driving around only carrying minimum limits. At least have the coverage to protect what you have. At least here, a 1M unbrella rider above and beyond on auto and farm owners was 250 bucks a year, and each additional 1M was 100 a year more.
 
Hi JDseller: You wrote: "I hear the farmers brag at the coffee shop about how they are not going to use the berm BECAUSE they pay taxes too and have the "Right" to use the pavement too. Have a neighbor that moves his combine with a thirty-five foot head. Does not even own a header trailer. Says it is the other people"s problem IF HE is blocking traffic." end quote.....
I will agree in a general way. Very often farmers state, with pride, just how independent they are and that seems to carry over to travel on
"Public" roads. Near Mankato on a 2 lane road early this Fall I ended up behind a long string of vehicals.. One farmer holding up many many people. Fair? It it just one tiny example. Needs to be another way for large farm equipment to be moved down "Public" roads without holding up so many other people who are also trying to earn a living also. ag.
 
Hi Dick L: Have you ever earned a living in a non-farming way? I'll guess not. I don't think you could make a living off the farm with that kind of view. Is that the way you treat other people when your in church, if you do go to church? Everyone best get out of your way? My goodness. Maybe you should carry a gun when driving dow the road with your extra large equipment.. (G).. Ag. ( I am pulling your chain a little since I don't need you food )
 
There's two different things you may be mixing here: who was "at fault" for the accident, and who is liable for the damages. I wouldn't be surprised if both the tractor driver and your friend were ticketed. She was probably going too fast for the conditions, and I'm fairly sure that farm equipment isn't exempt from staying on the right-hand side of the road. (Although that rule is routinely ignored.)

But even if nobody was ticketed, you can be certain that the insurance company for the SUV will go after both your friend and the tractor owner. Likewise your friend's insurance company may try to collect from the tractor owner's insurance.

We had an incident a while back here in Michigan where a motorist caused an accident that resulted in a fuel tanker fire. The tanker fire in turn destroyed a brand-new 3 million dollar bridge. The state not only went after the owner of the car and the owner of the tanker, they also tried to collect damages from the owner of a second truck that wasn't involved in the collision at all but just happened to be there when it happened. The driver of the second truck had been widely credited with avoiding a much worse collision through his skillful driving.
 
The SUV driver did nothing wrong, he didn't hit the planter or anything, the car came left of center and hit him. He was going the same speed as the tractor.
 
Isn't that called "Subrogation" or similar. Lots of things get settled behind the scenes, long after the original claims are settled. Insurance companies go after $$$ ...
 
photo
large_mks_combinecrash2.jpg
 
I understand.

What a judge & lawyers would find, I donno.

What I believe is both the lady & the farmer were somewhat at fault, exactly who shares what % is in the details...... We don't know the details....

Don't mean to be picking on the vehicle drivers; as a farmer, I've been passed on the shoulder while hauling wagons behind a tractor by a gravel truck driving on the shoulder at 55mph past me. And on & on and on. Gets kinda old, how many people are not in control, do not know the laws, and just plain don't have any clue of how dangerous _they_ are driving. I do my best out there, and I have a right to drive as well. Gets real old. Don't mean to have an attitude about a case I don't know much about. :)

--->Paul
 
I clearly understand what he was doing..HOWeveR,, If he would have given himself an extra hundred feet of distance from that "dangerous situation",(the overwidth tractor) there is a good chance that HE could have saved HIMSELF a whole lot of grief... It is called defensive driving..

Hopefully, everyone will learn something from this crash...I would be far more interested in the prevention of a future crash than finding fault in this one.... Saftey is everyone's responsibility, and there certainly are times when it pays to "cover" for another person's lack of attention..
 
Opinions are like armpits..... we've all got some and they're worth about as much as what one pays for them. Let the courts decide. (Hope you know the judge real well!)
 

The car driver definitely lost control..simple as that..
I see that you all seem to be on the same page..sue, sue. sue..
Why not put the blame where it belongs..on the Driver...??
 
An EXTRA 100'? Who's going to drive 200' behind a tractor going 15-20 mph? It's unlikely that a vehicle is going to hit YOU head on while following a slow moving vehicle. 100' in either direction and the car would have just went in the ditch.
 
It's not about suing, the car's probably worth only a few thousand, The SUV probably needs 5-8 grand in repairs and there's no injuries. Insurance will cover that. If it had been a semi, It would have been really bad because there is no way it could have stopped in time, nor would there be room to pass. I don't know what kind of lights were on the tractor if any, or if they were on. So it's not cut and dried that it's car drivers fault.
 
It's not about suing, the car's probably worth only a few thousand, The SUV probably needs 5-8 grand in repairs and there's no injuries. Insurance will cover that. If it had been a semi, It would have been really bad because there is no way it could have stopped in time, nor would there be room to pass. I don't know what kind of lights were on the tractor if any, or if they were on. So it's not cut and dried that it's car drivers fault.
 
I'd say by the looks of that pic, the car driver is clealy at fault. Left of center, a clear line of sight, good light, and dry road. It may be a violation to move a harvester on the road like that, but if the car passed 5 other cars, that's unsafe passing.
 
I agree with you. What was the car driver supposed to do? It was unfortunate that the tractor was just around a blind corner. So many people seem to think that the driver should have been able to control the car yet have no idea how much time there was to react. Not everyone on the road has the reflexes of a race car driver and maybe the car driver did the best that anybody else could have done in the same situation? She had to be paying attention or she would have hit the tractor or planter. A lot drivers would freeze up in a situation like that and just close their eyes and hope for the best. I think you need to give the car driver a break. I think the guy on the tractor should have taken precautions to warn on coming traffic. The SUV was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. The driver did state that the tractor was left of center. This would lead me to believe that they weren't blaming the driver of the car for the accident. Good thing no one was seriously injured. I'm sure the lawyers would have a field day. The farmer left the scene of an accident that he was, at the very least, partly to blame for. That's a serious offence, especially when someone could have been seriously injured or killed. Dave
 
John, if the planter had gotten clobbered, it's parts would fly WHERE?? No thanks, I will stay my safe distance.................................... I did not say he was WRONG,, I once more state that he would have been much SAFER if he had stayed back a further distance.. That overwidth tractor-planter was dangerous situation for everyone near that location..
 
Bushog, I'll bet you would be singing a different tune if you totaled your vehicle while trying to avoid another vehicle that had crossed the center line.

John T said it pretty clearly: "Defendant has a duty NOT to expose the Plaintiff to a reasonably forseeable risk of injury." I'd say that approaching a blind curve with an implement that's hanging over the center line clearly qualifies as something that has a "forseeable risk of injury".
 
In my state, Michigan, there is a law regarding implements of husbandy over the centerline while approaching a crest of a grade or a curve - that all vehicles need to be operated right of center and also any time head lights are required. I pay real close attention to this and always slow my equipment right down, espcially if I am too wide. I would not imagine it is too different in many other states. I would guess the tractor operator might be criminally and civil liable in this situation. I am reporting to jury duty today first time.
 
With a few phone calls, I'd bet you could get a dozen lawyers with a dozen different points of view. And you notice how many conflicting opinions you have here. With that said, only ONE opinion would matter, that being the opinion of a judge (or jury). Even with well defined laws, it's all in how the court INTERPRETS that law.

But, just for arguments sake, I've been involved in a wreck where someone hauling a mobile home made a turn, swung the rear end of the trailer into another lane as he was turning, and forced a car into my lane, where my truck was struck. (Sideswiped my truck, breaking side mirror and doing slight damage to rear quarter panel) The mobile home hauler was "legal" (had escort vehicle, lights, signs, ect) The vehicle that hit my truck was obviously across the center line when he hit me. HOWEVER....the judge decided it was an "unavoidable accident due to unusual conditions" (whatever that means) , not the fault of any driver involved. My insurance covered my truck, other drivers insurance covered his, mobile home hauler was excused from ALL liability.
 
Mark, thats right, and ONLY the Jury gets to decide what was "reasonably forseeable", and, if they find such and it was the proximate cause of injuries JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF. (subject to comparative fault and contributory negligence etc) My Torts Professor constantly had us repeat that standard when we studied Negligence. That all needs coupled, however, with laws regarding comparative fault, last clear chance etc etc dependant on jurisdiction. The law of Negligence is pretty well settled (once facts are determined), its just that there are numerous fact finder jury determinations that must first be made and thereafter it the application of appropriate law which is the Court's job. The old joke in law school was that if we found that so called "reasonable man" he would be boring and nobody we cared to have a drink with lol

Take care

John T
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Steve in VA
Just a green tractor
Replies
9
Views
870
560Dennis
560Dennis
J
Corn planting 1993
Replies
3
Views
377
Jeff in ND
J
jon f mn
Update on railroad flooding
Replies
17
Views
2K
bobfeather
B
7
off topic prayers needed
Replies
6
Views
392
cushman
C
M
Massey 285 dies after running an hour?
Replies
4
Views
351
Janicholson
Janicholson
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top