In a California personal injury case involving merging without checking blind spots, which leads to a collision, the driver who failed to properly check their blind spot before merging may be held negligent. In California, all drivers are required to operate their vehicles in a reasonably safe manner, which includes ensuring that the lane change or merge is safe before proceeding. Failure to do so can be the basis for liability in the event of an accident.
🚨 Legal Principles and Duties
🔹 California Vehicle Code § 21703 – Following Too Closely
While this law specifically deals with following distances, it also emphasizes the general expectation that drivers must be aware of their surroundings, including checking their blind spots, before making maneuvers like merging or lane changes. Not checking the blind spot is a form of unsafe driving.
🔹 California Vehicle Code § 21658 – Lane Change
This law requires that drivers change lanes or merge only when it is safe to do so. This includes ensuring that the lane is clear and that no vehicles are in the driver’s blind spot.
- Merging without checking blind spots is a violation of the duty to make sure the lane is clear and safe to merge into. A collision resulting from such an action may establish negligence on the part of the driver who failed to check their blind spot.
🔹 Duty of Care and Reasonable Care
Under California law, every driver owes a duty of care to others on the road to operate their vehicle in a safe manner. This includes checking blind spots before changing lanes or merging. If the driver fails to exercise reasonable care and causes a collision, they can be found negligent.
⚖️ Causation and Liability in a Blind Spot Collision
In a collision caused by failing to check a blind spot, establishing causation is key. The injured party must demonstrate that but for the failure to check the blind spot, the collision would not have occurred.
For example:
- Driver AÂ fails to check their blind spot while merging onto the freeway.
- Driver B, who is in the adjacent lane, has no time to react and collides with Driver A‘s vehicle.
- The failure of Driver A to check their blind spot is the direct cause of the accident.
The question of liability will depend on proving that the driver’s failure to check the blind spot was a substantial factor in causing the collision.
🧾 Key Evidence in a Blind Spot Merging Case
To establish liability in a case involving merging without checking blind spots, the following evidence is crucial:
- Police reports: The police report may contain important details about the cause of the collision, including any citations issued to the driver who failed to check their blind spot. It may also include statements from officers about the unsafe merging behavior.
- Witness statements: Statements from other drivers or pedestrians who observed the collision or the actions of the drivers involved can help establish that Driver A failed to check their blind spot before merging.
- Dashcam footage: If either driver has a dashcam or there are nearby traffic cameras, footage showing the unsafe lane change or merge can be a powerful piece of evidence in proving fault.
- Vehicle damage analysis: The location and severity of damage to the vehicles can help establish how the collision occurred. For example, damage to the sides of the vehicles may suggest a sideswipe collision caused by an unsafe merge.
- Testimony from accident reconstruction experts: An expert can help establish how the collision occurred, including how the failure to check the blind spot contributed to the accident.
🛡️ Potential Defenses
If the driver who failed to check their blind spot is facing liability, they may attempt to raise the following defenses:
- The merge was not unsafe: The defendant may argue that the merge was safe, despite not checking the blind spot, and that the collision was caused by the other driver’s negligence (e.g., speeding, following too closely).
- Contributory negligence: The defendant might argue that the other driver was partially at fault for the accident, such as being in Driver A’s blind spot, or driving recklessly, such as tailgating or speeding.
- Sudden emergency: The defendant may claim that they had to make the merge due to a sudden emergency (e.g., avoiding another vehicle or hazard) and could not check the blind spot in time. This defense would be more applicable if the situation was unusual or unexpected.
⚖️ Liability and Damages
In California, pure comparative negligence applies, meaning that fault can be shared between multiple parties based on their level of responsibility in causing the accident. Even if the injured party was partially at fault, they can still recover damages, though their compensation will be reduced based on their degree of fault.
For example:
- Driver A may be found 70% at fault for failing to check their blind spot and causing the collision.
- Driver B, who was rear-ended or sideswiped, may be found 30% at fault if they were tailgating or driving too fast for the conditions.
Damages that may be recovered in a personal injury case include:
- Medical expenses (current and future treatment costs)
- Lost wages (if the injury causes the victim to miss work)
- Pain and suffering (both physical and emotional distress)
- Property damage (vehicle repair costs)
- Emotional distress (if the accident led to significant psychological trauma)
âś… Conclusion
In California, merging without checking blind spots can be a major factor in establishing negligence in a personal injury case. If the driver who failed to check their blind spot caused a collision, they may be held liable for damages resulting from the accident. Evidence such as police reports, dashcam footage, and witness statements will be key in proving fault.
Law Offices of James R. Dickinson – 909-848-8448
How To Schedule A Consultation:
Please call us at 909-848-8448 to schedule a free consultation/case evaluation or complete the form immediately below. [Please note certain formalities must be completed to retain the Law Offices of James R. Dickinson, such as the signing of a legal fee agreement [see “Disclaimers”]].