Rear-Ended by a Driver Who Suffered a Fatal Medical Emergency

Attorney Answer

The other driver's death does not end your claim, but his medical emergency may weaken it. California judges a driver who lost consciousness at the wheel by ordinary negligence, not strict liability, so his insurer can argue he was not at fault at all. That is the risk to weigh before you accept $750 while you are still in treatment, and it is the reason to have a lawyer look at this now.

Start with the rule that normally makes a rear-end collision straightforward. Cal. Veh. Code § 21703 provides that "the driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway." A driver who runs into a car stopped at a red light has almost always violated it, and that violation supports a finding of negligence.

The medical emergency is the complication, and you should hear it plainly. In Hammontree v. Jenner, 20 Cal. App. 3d 528 (1971), a driver with a long-treated seizure disorder lost consciousness without warning and crashed into a shop. The injured owners asked the court to hold him strictly liable regardless of fault. The Court of Appeal refused: a driver suddenly stricken by an illness that renders him unconscious is judged on negligence principles, and the jury's verdict for the driver stood. What that means for you is that the question is not whether he hit you, which is undisputed, but whether he knew or should have known he was at risk of losing control at the wheel. A driver with a known condition who drove against medical advice, or ignored warning symptoms, is negligent. A driver struck without warning by something no one could have predicted may not be. His medical history, which his insurer has and you do not, decides which of those this was.

His insurer's conduct so far is a signal, not a promise. It has paid for a rental car, processed the total loss and made an offer on your injury. Insurers do not usually do that when they intend to deny liability. But an offer is not an admission, and $750 while you are still in acupuncture and about to start physical therapy is an offer to close the claim before its size is known.

Do not sign anything that closes the injury claim yet. Cal. Civ. Code § 1541 provides that "an obligation is extinguished by a release therefrom given to the debtor or the released party by the creditor or releasing party, upon a new consideration, or in writing, with or without new consideration." A signed release ends the claim for every bill that comes after it. Separately, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 10, § 2695.7(g) prohibits an insurer from attempting to settle a claim with an offer that is unreasonably low, and it lists what the Insurance Commissioner weighs in judging that, including the extent to which the insurer considered the evidence you submitted about the value of the claim.

On the issue the first lawyer raised: if your health coverage is through Medi-Cal — many California county health plans are Medi-Cal managed-care plans — the program has a right to be repaid from what you recover for the treatment it covered. Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 14124.71(a) gives the program the right to recover from the liable party the reasonable value of the benefits it provided, and later sections of that chapter cap what it can take from your recovery. That does not bar your claim. It reduces what you net from it, and a lawyer has to account for the repayment, and negotiate it, before any settlement is final. That is most likely what "created an issue" meant. It is a reason to choose a lawyer familiar with health-plan reimbursement, not a reason to go without one. The $10,000 figure you mention may be that reimbursement, or it may be a policy limit. Find out which, in writing, because it changes what the offer means.

The car is a separate claim and does not have to wait for the injury claim. Under Cal. Code Regs. tit. 10, § 2695.8(b), a total-loss settlement must be based on the actual cost of a comparable automobile in your local market, plus applicable taxes and fees, itemized and explained in writing.

What you can do

1. Do not sign a release or accept the $750 while treatment is ongoing. Tell the adjuster in writing that the injury claim stays open until your treatment is complete.

2. Ask the adjuster in writing whether the insurer accepts liability for the collision, and what the bodily-injury limit on the policy is.

3. Request the police report and the written total-loss valuation. If the valuation is fair, the car can be settled on its own.

4. Keep every medical record, receipt and appointment: the 911 call, the acupuncture course, the physical-therapy approval, mileage and missed work.

5. Ask your health plan in writing for an itemized statement of what it has paid for treatment related to the crash. That figure is what a lawyer needs first.

6. Talk to a local personal-injury attorney now and raise three things: the medical-emergency defense, the health-plan reimbursement, and the effect of the driver's death on your deadlines. Most take injury cases on a contingency fee and offer a brief initial call at no cost, and a few minutes on your specific facts, and on how adjusters and courts in your county handle this, is worth more than any general guidance, including this page.

⏱ Time limits apply. An injury claim is ordinarily governed by Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1, which allows two years, and the claim for your car by Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 338(c)(1), which allows three, both running from the accident. But the other driver has died, and that changes the clock. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 366.2 provides that when the person who would be liable dies before the ordinary period runs out, an action may be commenced within one year after the date of death, and the period that would otherwise have applied does not apply. That is shorter than two years. Cal. Prob. Code §§ 550–555 let a claim proceed against the deceased driver's insurance without opening a probate estate, with recovery limited to the policy, and how that route interacts with the one-year rule depends on your facts. Do not rely on the two-year figure. Have a local attorney review your dates now.