The Wrong Way to Pass
Case Summary: Plaintiff, a police chief in an unmarked vehicle, was responding on a two-lane road to a domestic violence call. A tanker truck turned left in front of him, causing him to run off the road to avoid striking the truck. Plaintiff sued the driver of the truck and the trucking company for injuries he sustained in the crash, claiming that the driver of the truck failed to yield to the emergency vehicle as required by law. Defense retained a Police Procedures Expert with DJS Associates, Inc. to examine the actions of both drivers.
Expert Analysis: In order to claim that the truck failed to yield, it was necessary to prove that Plaintiff’s vehicle met the standards of the law, specifically that the lights and siren were activated.
Plaintiff testified that the lights and siren were activated but admitted that there was a complicated system of switches needed to activate the siren. Plaintiff’s in-car camera was not downloaded after the accident, so the only evidence was Plaintiff’s radio transmissions. The transmissions immediately before and after the crash did not have the sound of a siren in them.
Furthermore, to claim failure to yield, the driver must be aware of the presence of the emergency vehicle. Defendant testified that the mirror was checked before starting to turn and that the police car suddenly appeared before running off the road. Defendant claimed their vehicle’s brakes were hit as soon as the police vehicle was seen and that the center line of the road was never crossed.
Plaintiff testified to remaining behind the truck until reaching a distance of approximately 50 feet, at which point the pass was initiated. This would have placed Plaintiff in Defendant’s blind spot during the approach, and at the speed Plaintiff was traveling, the truck would have been passed in less than two seconds, leaving Defendant little time to react. Plaintiff also admitted not sounding the air horn or changing siren pitch of the vehicle before attempting the pass, both of which are taught in training.
Next was the issue of Defendant’s truck blocking the road. Plaintiff claimed it was ¾ of the way across the road, leaving him no option but to run off the road. Plaintiff stated that the truck was not moving as he approached and started turning as he attempted to pass. This was not possible since, from a dead stop, the truck would have only been moving at 2-3 feet per second and could not have moved the 18 feet needed to block ¾ of the road in the less than 2 seconds it would have taken for Plaintiff to pass. In addition, the officer who did the accident report drew Defendant’s truck as completely within its own lane on the accident diagram.
Result: The expert concluded that the accident did not happen the way Plaintiff claimed, and Defendant had not failed to yield to the unmarked emergency vehicle. Plaintiff’s siren was not in use, and he had contributed to the accident by approaching in the truck’s blind spot, not having a contingency plan, and not using emergency equipment correctly.
