The last Saturday of November started out as one of those kinda aimless days. I had a bit of work-work to do and I had some house work also. Deep down I was an unhappy camper for reasons I can’t always get at. I just know what I feel, not why.

Earlier, I had come to the awareness I am content with my work situation, but I am not fulfilled in it.

In conversing with God about this the way I do, I made pretty clear I was discouraged, and I desperately needed something to strengthen my confidence and hope for the future. And just in case the wireless heaven-line was busy that first time, I repeated it. “Hello: I need a new sign of hope.” It was said in various ways with various levels of lament or gate-of-heaven smashing defiance. A few requests found the happy humbler middle.

I went about my day, tugging my proverbial bootstraps as if by moving the boots I was motivating me.

It worked. I got busy and my request for new hope – for a sign from God – became a vague darkness in the back of my mind and depths of my heart. I remained alert for signals, looking for them to come in ways I expected: an email from a church inquiring further about hiring me; or a phone call from the bank saying there’d been an error in calculations for all my life and they had $10,000 for me… that kind of thing. Nada. None of that happened. I was watching carefully, remember!

During the week I had written a report to the board in of the camp I live and work in, a report in which among the good things I had to share I had mentioned two things I was dissatisfied with, two things that frustrated me in my work. One was an extremely slow desk computer, the other was a lack of a reversible drill, either corded or cordless to make some of my repair tasks more efficient. Numerous times I had done repetitive screw turning by hand. Reporting these irritants was more about venting and getting things known. It was done without serious expectation of change. Maybe it was even a precursor to the glum feelings Saturday morning. It likely had some self-pity in it. I’m good at that (He said with insecurity-covering-ego-pride, another thing he’s good at).

Well, I need to tell you that it wasn’t until this morning, the day of writing this, Sunday, when I picked something up from where I had set it down yesterday that I realized very unusual, non-coincidental, sign-like things had happened, and I missed them completely, even though I was part of it. I made no connection in the moment.

Saturday a lady came to the camp to do some cleaning as a volunteer. As I went over to check if there was anything she needed and to describe what I’d done to prepare for her arrival, she opened her trunk and said “could you use a cordless drill? And I have a cordless screwdriver here too. Here, take them. I don’t have a use for them.” And so I picked them up, duly thanked her dully and started walking toward the camp workshop to put them away. She said: “No no no, keep them in your house, use them for yourself” and so, my steps a little lighter with a load that was now mine, I dropped them off in my back room and went back out into the dull weather to do some things.

Later, the two guys from the camp board who do the property work came. They said “We’re here to see if we can speed up your computer with new memory chips and a cleanup, and Pete, we brought you a cordless drill” to which I replied “I already got one” and I fetched it and enjoyed seeing their tool envy. I can’t remember ever having others envy tools I had. But still, I was nonchalant in the bigger picture sense of things. No lights were going on for me.

Nothing registered until Sunday, when I pulled the cordless drill out of it’s neatly compartmentalized box with bits and attachments each with their own cubby, and I realized it had two batteries with the charger, it was a 14.4 volt Mastercraft (newer units, I knew, had voltages in the teens, older ones were below 10), a nice darker blue colour that I like with bright yellow buttons, it had an adjustable clutch for if you were either drilling or driving screws, it was not only reversible but had two speeds and, most significant, it looked like it had probably been used once on a Sunday afternoon it was so clean and unscathed. And I held it in my hand, and felt the heft and balance of it and imagined the torque and whine of it, and the ability to reverse and to adjust the clutch… and I realized something unique had indeed happened the day before.

For this lady to show up with a drill, particularly not knowing anything of my whine in my report, and then for those guys to arrive ready to address my concerns when I didn’t expect it, well I had to admit it was notable or remarkable at the very least, and worth a silent restrained-Reformed “thank you Lord” (Hallelujahs are too charismatic in such situations, as is Holy Celebration Dance). And for it all to happen that same day, within hours of my lament! Quite something. I’m not sure how to interpret the sign though. I’m reluctant to give it too much meaning. I’m watching my email still, and waiting for the bank to call…

Somewhere in me I know my problem is that I’m missing the billboard message. I’m missing it because I’m not liking it. It doesn’t fit my plan, my agenda, my hopes and aspirations. God seems, at least at the time of writing, to be reinforcing me where I am with hope signals on request. My problem is my agenda is not the same as Gods.
Who’s going to change agenda’s first?
Stay tuned. The batteries are charging. Will a green light go on for Pete, or will it stay red?

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23153 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23153 provides:

23153. (a) It is unlawful for any person, while under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle and concurrently do any act forbidden by law, or neglect any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than the driver. (b) It is unlawful for any person, while having 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle and concurrently do any act forbidden by law, or neglect any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than the driver. In any prosecution under this subdivision, it is a rebuttable presumption that the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within three hours after driving. (c) In proving the person neglected any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, it is not necessary to prove that any specific section of this code was violated. (d) It is unlawful for any person, while having 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a commercial motor vehicle, as defined in Section 15210, and concurrently to do any act forbidden by law or neglect any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than the driver. In any prosecution under this subdivision, it is a rebuttable presumption that the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of performance of a chemical test within three hours after driving. (e) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1992, and shall remain operative until the director determines that federal regulations adopted pursuant to the Commercial Motor Vehicle Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C. Sec. 2701 et seq.) contained in Section 383.51 or 391.15 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations do not require the state to prohibit operation of commercial vehicles when the operator has a concentration of alcohol in his or her blood of 0.04 percent by weight or more. (f) The director shall submit a notice of the determination under subdivision (e) to the Secretary of State, and this section shall be repealed upon the receipt of that notice by the Secretary of State.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23153, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23153, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23152 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23152 provides:

23152. (a) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle. (b) It is unlawful for any person who has 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle. For purposes of this article and Section 34501.16, percent, by weight, of alcohol in a person’s blood is based upon grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood or grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath. In any prosecution under this subdivision, it is a rebuttable presumption that the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within three hours after the driving. (c) It is unlawful for any person who is addicted to the use of any drug to drive a vehicle. This subdivision shall not apply to a person who is participating in a narcotic treatment program approved pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 11875) of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 10.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (d) It is unlawful for any person who has 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a commercial motor vehicle, as defined in Section 15210. In any prosecution under this subdivision, it is a rebuttable presumption that the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.04 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within three hours after the driving. (e) This section shall become operative on January 1, 1992, and shall remain operative until the director determines that federal regulations adopted pursuant to the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C. Sec. 2701 et seq.) contained in Section 383.51 or 391.15 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations do not require the state to prohibit operation of commercial vehicles when the operator has a concentration of alcohol in his or her blood of 0.04 percent by weight or more. (f) The director shall submit a notice of the determination under subdivision (e) to the Secretary of State, and this section shall be repealed upon the receipt of that notice by the Secretary of State.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23152, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23152, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23140 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23140 provides:

23140. (a) It is unlawful for a person under the age of 21 years who has 0.05 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle. (b) A person may be found to be in violation of subdivision (a) if the person was, at the time of driving, under the age of 21 years and under the influence of, or affected by, an alcoholic beverage regardless of whether a chemical test was made to determine that person’s blood-alcohol concentration and if the trier of fact finds that the person had consumed an alcoholic beverage and was driving a vehicle while having a concentration of 0.05 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood. (c) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, upon a finding that a person has violated this section, the clerk of the court shall prepare within 10 days after the finding and immediately forward to the department an abstract of the record of the court in which the finding is made. That abstract shall be a public record and available for public inspection in the same manner as other records reported under Section 1803.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23140, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23140, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23104 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23104 provides:

23104. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), whenever reckless driving of a vehicle proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver, the person driving the vehicle shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days nor more than six months or by a fine of not less than two hundred twenty dollars ($220) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment. (b) A person convicted of reckless driving that proximately causes great bodily injury, as defined in Section 12022.7 of the Penal Code, to a person other than the driver, who previously has been convicted of a violation of Section 23103, 23104, 23105, 23109, 23109.1, 23152, or 23153, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days nor more than six months or by a fine of not less than two hundred twenty dollars ($220) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by both the fine and imprisonment.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23104, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23104, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23103 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23103 provides:

23103. (a) A person who drives a vehicle upon a highway in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving. (b) A person who drives a vehicle in an offstreet parking facility, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12500, in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving. (c) Persons convicted of the offense of reckless driving shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than five days nor more than 90 days or by a fine of not less than one hundred forty-five dollars ($145) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, except as provided in Section 23104 or 23105.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23103, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23103, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 21651 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 21651 provides:

21651. (a) Whenever a highway has been divided into two or more roadways by means of intermittent barriers or by means of a dividing section of not less than two feet in width, either unpaved or delineated by curbs, double-parallel lines, or other markings on the roadway, it is unlawful to do either of the following: (1) To drive any vehicle over, upon, or across the dividing section. (2) To make any left, semicircular, or U-turn with the vehicle on the divided highway, except through an opening in the barrier designated and intended by public authorities for the use of vehicles or through a plainly marked opening in the dividing section. (b) It is unlawful to drive any vehicle upon a highway, except to the right of an intermittent barrier or a dividing section which separates two or more opposing lanes of traffic. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (c), a violation of this subdivision is a misdemeanor. (c) Any willful violation of subdivision (b) which results in injury to, or death of, a person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more than six months.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 21651, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 21651, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 20002 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 20002 provides:

20002. (a) The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting only in damage to any property, including vehicles, shall immediately stop the vehicle at the nearest location that will not impede traffic or otherwise jeopardize the safety of other motorists. Moving the vehicle in accordance with this subdivision does not affect the question of fault. The driver shall also immediately do either of the following: (1) Locate and notify the owner or person in charge of that property of the name and address of the driver and owner of the vehicle involved and, upon locating the driver of any other vehicle involved or the owner or person in charge of any damaged property, upon being requested, present his or her driver’s license, and vehicle registration, to the other driver, property owner, or person in charge of that property. The information presented shall include the current residence address of the driver and of the registered owner. If the registered owner of an involved vehicle is present at the scene, he or she shall also, upon request, present his or her driver’s license information, if available, or other valid identification to the other involved parties. (2) Leave in a conspicuous place on the vehicle or other property damaged a written notice giving the name and address of the driver and of the owner of the vehicle involved and a statement of the circumstances thereof and shall without unnecessary delay notify the police department of the city wherein the collision occurred or, if the collision occurred in unincorporated territory, the local headquarters of the Department of the California Highway Patrol. (b) Any person who parks a vehicle which, prior to the vehicle again being driven, becomes a runaway vehicle and is involved in an accident resulting in damage to any property, attended or unattended, shall comply with the requirements of this section relating to notification and reporting and shall, upon conviction thereof, be liable to the penalties of this section for failure to comply with the requirements. (c) Any person failing to comply with all the requirements of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 20002, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 20002, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 20001 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 20001 provides:

20001. (a) The driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to a person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of a person shall immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and shall fulfill the requirements of Sections 20003 and 20004. (b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a person who violates subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine. (2) If the accident described in subdivision (a) results in death or permanent, serious injury, a person who violates subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, or by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both that imprisonment and fine. However, the court, in the interests of justice and for reasons stated in the record, may reduce or eliminate the minimum imprisonment required by this paragraph. (3) In imposing the minimum fine required by this subdivision, the court shall take into consideration the defendant’s ability to pay the fine and, in the interests of justice and for reasons stated in the record, may reduce the amount of that minimum fine to less than the amount otherwise required by this subdivision. (c) A person who flees the scene of the crime after committing a violation of Section 191.5 of, or paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 192 of the Penal Code, upon conviction of any of those sections, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed, shall be punished by an additional term of imprisonment of five years in the state prison. This additional term shall not be imposed unless the allegation is charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be true by the trier of fact. The court shall not strike a finding that brings a person within the provisions of this subdivision or an allegation made pursuant to this subdivision. (d) As used in this section, “permanent, serious injury” means the loss or permanent impairment of function of a bodily member or organ.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 20001, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 20001, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 34501.2 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 34501.2 provides:

34501.2. (a) The regulations adopted under Section 34501 for vehicles engaged in interstate or intrastate commerce shall establish hours-of-service regulations for drivers of those vehicles that are consistent with the hours-of-service regulations adopted by the United States Department of Transportation in Part 395 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as those regulations now exist or are hereafter amended. (b) The regulations adopted under Section 34501 for vehicles engaged in intrastate commerce that are not transporting hazardous substances or hazardous waste, as those terms are defined by regulations in Section 171.8 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as those regulations now exist or are hereafter amended, shall have the following exceptions: (1) The maximum driving time within a work period shall be 12 hours for a driver of a truck or truck tractor, except for a driver of a tank vehicle with a capacity of more than 500 gallons transporting flammable liquid, who shall not drive for more than 10 hours within a work period. (2) No motor carrier shall permit or require a driver to drive, nor shall any driver drive, for any period after having been on duty for 80 hours in any consecutive eight days. (3) A driver employed by an electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code, a gas corporation, as defined in Section 222 of that code, a telephone corporation, as defined in Section 234 of that code, a water corporation, as defined in Section 241 of that code, or a public water district as defined in Section 20200 of the Water Code, may be permitted or required to drive more than the number of hours specified in subdivision (a) while operating a public utility or public water district vehicle during the emergency restoration of service. (4) Any other exceptions applicable to drivers assigned to governmental fire suppression and prevention, as determined by the department. (5) A driver employed by a law enforcement agency, as defined in Section 390.3(f)(2) of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as that section now exists or is hereafter amended, during an emergency or to restore the public peace. (c) The regulations adopted under Section 34501 for vehicles engaged in the transportation of farm products in intrastate commerce shall include all of the following provisions: (1) A driver employed by an agricultural carrier, including a carrier holding a seasonal permit, or by a private carrier, when transporting farm products from the field to the first point of processing or packing, shall not drive for any period after having been on duty 16 hours or more following eight consecutive hours off duty and shall not drive for any period after having been on duty for 112 hours in any consecutive eight-day period, except that a driver transporting special situation farm products from the field to the first point of processing or packing, or transporting livestock from pasture to pasture, may be permitted, during one period of not more than 28 consecutive days or a combination of two periods totaling not more than 28 days in a calendar year, to drive for not more than 12 hours during any workday of not more than 16 hours. A driver who thereby exceeds the driving time limits specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) shall maintain a driver’s record of duty status, and shall keep a duplicate copy in his or her possession when driving a vehicle subject to this chapter. These records shall be presented immediately upon request by any authorized employee of the department, or any police officer or deputy sheriff. (2) Upon the request of the Director of Food and Agriculture, the commissioner may, for good cause, temporarily waive the maximum on-duty time limits applicable to any eight-day period when an emergency exists due to inclement weather, natural disaster, or an adverse economic condition that threatens to disrupt the orderly movement of farm products during harvest for the duration of the emergency. For purposes of this paragraph, an emergency does not include a strike or labor dispute. (3) For purposes of this subdivision, the following terms have the following meanings: (A) “Farm products” means every agricultural, horticultural, viticultural, or vegetable product of the soil, honey and beeswax, oilseeds, poultry, livestock, milk, or timber. (B) “First point of processing or packing” means a location where farm products are dried, canned, extracted, fermented, distilled, frozen, ginned, eviscerated, pasteurized, packed, packaged, bottled, conditioned, or otherwise manufactured, processed, or preserved for distribution in wholesale or retail markets. (C) “Special situation farm products” means fruit, tomatoes, sugar beets, grains, wine grapes, grape concentrate, cotton, or nuts.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 34501.2, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 34501.2, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 27803 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 27803 provides:

27803. (a) A driver and any passenger shall wear a safety helmet meeting requirements established pursuant to Section 27802 when riding on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle. (b) It is unlawful to operate a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a). (c) It is unlawful to ride as a passenger on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a). (d) This section applies to persons who are riding on motorcycles, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycles operated on the highways. (e) For the purposes of this section, “wear a safety helmet” or “wearing a safety helmet” means having a safety helmet meeting the requirements of Section 27802 on the person’s head that is fastened with the helmet straps and that is of a size that fits the wearing person’s head securely without excessive lateral or vertical movement. (f) This section does not apply to a person operating, or riding as a passenger in, a fully enclosed three-wheeled motor vehicle that is not less than seven feet in length and not less than four feet in width, and has an unladen weight of 900 pounds or more, if the vehicle meets or exceeds all of the requirements of this code, the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, and the rules and regulations adopted by the United States Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (g) In enacting this section, it is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that all persons are provided with an additional safety benefit while operating or riding a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 27803, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 27803, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 27360 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 27360 provides:

27360. (a) A parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may not permit his or her child or ward to be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly securing the child or ward in a rear seat in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, unless the child or ward is one of the following: (1) Six years of age or older. (2) Sixty pounds or more. (b) (1) A driver may not transport on a highway a child in a motor vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, without properly securing the child in a rear seat in a child passenger restraint system meeting applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, unless the child is one of the following: (A) Six years of age or older. (B) Sixty pounds or more. (2) This subdivision does not apply to a driver if the parent or legal guardian of the child is also present in the vehicle and is not the driver. (c) (1) For purposes of subdivisions (a) and (b), and except as provided in paragraph (2), a child or ward under the age of six years who weighs less than 60 pounds may ride in the front seat of a motor vehicle, if properly secured in a child passenger restraint system that meets applicable federal motor vehicle safety standards, under any of the following circumstances: (A) There is no rear seat. (B) The rear seats are side-facing jump seats. (C) The rear seats are rear-facing seats. (D) The child passenger restraint system cannot be installed properly in the rear seat. (E) All rear seats are already occupied by children under the age of 12 years. (F) Medical reasons necessitate that the child or ward not ride in the rear seat. The court may require satisfactory proof of the child’ s medical condition. (2) A child or ward may not ride in the front seat of a motor vehicle with an active passenger airbag if the child or ward is one of the following: (A) Under one year of age. (B) Less than 20 pounds. (C) Riding in a rear-facing child passenger restraint system. (d) (1) (A) A first offense under this section is punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars ($100), except that the court may reduce or waive the fine if the defendant establishes to the satisfaction of the court that he or she is economically disadvantaged, and the court, instead, refers the defendant to a community education program that includes, but is not limited to, education on the proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system for children of all ages, and provides certification to the court of completion of that program. Upon completion of the program, the defendant shall provide proof of participation in the program. If an education program on the proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system is not available within 50 miles of the residence of the defendant, the requirement to participate in that program shall be waived. If the fine is paid, waived, or reduced, the court shall report the conviction to the department pursuant to Section 1803. (B) The court may require a defendant described under this section to attend an education program that includes demonstration of proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system and provides certification to the court that the defendant has presented for inspection a child passenger restraint system that meets applicable federal safety standards. (2) (A) A second or subsequent offense under this section is punishable by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars ($250), no part of which may be waived by the court, except that the court may reduce or waive the fine if the defendant establishes to the satisfaction of the court that he or she is economically disadvantaged, and the court, instead, refers the defendant to a community education program that includes, but is not limited to, education on the proper installation and use of child passenger restraint systems for children of all ages, and provides certification to the court of completion of that program. Upon completion of the program, the defendant shall provide proof of participation in the program. If an education program on the proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system is not available within 50 miles of the residence of the defendant, the requirement to participate in that program shall be waived. If the fine is paid, waived, or reduced, the court shall report the conviction to the department pursuant to Section 1803. (B) The court may require a defendant described under this section to attend an education program that includes demonstration of proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system and provides certification to the court that the defendant has presented for inspection a child passenger restraint system that meets applicable federal safety standards. (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the fines collected for a violation of this section shall be allocated as follows: (1) (A) Sixty percent to health departments of local jurisdictions where the violation occurred, to be used for a community education program that includes, but is not limited to, demonstration of the installation of a child passenger restraint system for children of all ages and also assists an economically disadvantaged family in obtaining a restraint system through a low-cost purchase or loan. The county or city health department shall designate a coordinator to facilitate the creation of a special account and to develop a relationship with the court system to facilitate the transfer of funds to the program. The county or city may contract for the implementation of the program. Prior to obtaining possession of a child passenger restraint system pursuant to this section, a person shall attend an education program that includes demonstration of proper installation and use of a child passenger restraint system. (B) As the proceeds from fines become available, county or city health departments shall prepare and maintain a listing of all child passenger restraint low-cost purchase or loaner programs in their counties, including a semiannual verification that all programs listed are in existence. Each county or city shall forward the listing to the Office of Traffic Safety in the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and the courts, birthing centers, community child health and disability prevention programs, county clinics, prenatal clinics, women, infants, and children programs, and county hospitals in that county, who shall make the listing available to the public. The Office of Traffic Safety shall maintain a listing of all of the programs in the state. (2) Twenty-five percent to the county or city for the administration of the program. (3) Fifteen percent to the city, to be deposited in its general fund except that, if the violation occurred in an unincorporated area, this amount shall be allocated to the county for purposes of paragraph (1).

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 27360, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 27360, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 24604 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 24604 provides:

24604. Whenever the load upon any vehicle extends, or whenever any integral part of any vehicle projects, to the rear four feet or more beyond the rear of the vehicle, as measured from the taillamps, there shall be displayed at the extreme end of the load or projecting part of the vehicle during darkness, in addition to the required taillamp, two red lights with a bulb rated not in excess of six candlepower plainly visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the sides and rear. At any other time there shall be displayed at the extreme end of the load or projecting part of the vehicle a solid red or fluorescent orange flag or cloth not less than 12 inches square.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 24604, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 24604, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 24409 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 24409 provides:

24409. Whenever a motor vehicle is being operated during darkness, the driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, directed high enough and of sufficient intensity to reveal persons and vehicles at a safe distance in advance of the vehicle, subject to the following requirements and limitations: (a) Whenever the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, he shall use a distribution of light or composite beam so aimed that the glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver. The lowermost distribution of light specified in this article shall be deemed to avoid glare at all times regardless of road contour. (b) Whenever the driver of a vehicle follows another vehicle within 300 feet to the rear, he shall use the lowermost distribution of light specified in this article.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 24409, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 24409, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 24252 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 24252 provides:

24252. (a) All lighting equipment of a required type installed on a vehicle shall at all times be maintained in good working order. Lamps shall be equipped with bulbs of the correct voltage rating corresponding to the nominal voltage at the lamp socket. (b) The voltage at any tail, stop, license plate, side marker or clearance lamp socket on a vehicle shall not be less than 85 percent of the design voltage of the bulb. Voltage tests shall be conducted with the engine operating. (c) Two or more lamp or reflector functions may be combined, provided each function subject to requirements established by the department meets such requirements. (1) No turn signal lamp may be combined optically with a stoplamp unless the stoplamp is extinguished when the turn signal is flashing. (2) No clearance lamp may be combined optically with any taillamp or identification lamp.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 24252, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 24252, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 24002 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 24002 provides:

24002. (a) It is unlawful to operate any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is in an unsafe condition, or which is not safely loaded, and which presents an immediate safety hazard. (b) It is unlawful to operate any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is not equipped as provided in this code.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 24002, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 24002, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23270 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23270 provides:

23270. (a) No person shall commence to tow any vehicle or other object on any vehicular crossing unless authorized to do so by the Department of Transportation and unless the towing is done by means of a tow truck as defined in Section 615. No person, other than a member of the California Highway Patrol or an employee of the Department of Transportation, shall, by means of pushing with another vehicle, propel any vehicle or object on a vehicular crossing. No person, other than an employee of the Department of Transportation, shall, on any vehicular crossing, tow any vehicle or other object except a vehicle or object constructed and designed to be towed by a vehicle of a type similar to that being used for this purpose. (b) The California Transportation Commission shall, by regulation, establish the maximum towing fee which may be charged by any person authorized to tow a vehicle pursuant to subdivision (a). No authorized person shall charge a fee for towing a vehicle which is in excess of the maximum fee established by the California Transportation Commission. (c) The Director of Transportation may grant a special permit to any person to tow any vehicle or object over and completely across any vehicular crossing when in his or her judgment the towing vehicle is so constructed and equipped that the vehicle or object can be towed across the vehicular crossing without endangering persons or property and without interrupting the orderly traffic across the vehicular crossing. (d) The prohibitions of this section shall apply only on those vehicular crossings upon which a towing service is maintained by the Department of Transportation.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23270, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23270, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23116 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23116 provides:

23116. (a) No person driving a pickup truck or a flatbed motortruck on a highway shall transport any person in or on the back of the truck. (b) No person shall ride in or on the back of a truck or flatbed motortruck being driven on a highway. (c) Subdivisions (a) and (b) do not apply if the person in the back of the truck is secured with a restraint system. The restraint system shall meet or exceed the federal motor vehicle safety standards published in Sections 571.207, 571.209, and 571.210 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (d) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) do not apply to any person transporting one or more persons in the back of a truck or flatbed motortruck owned by a farmer or rancher, if that vehicle is used exclusively within the boundaries of lands owned or managed by that farmer or rancher, including the incidental use of that vehicle on not more than one mile of highway between one part of the farm or ranch to another part of that farm or ranch. (e) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) do not apply if the person in the back of the truck or the flatbed is being transported in an emergency response situation by a public agency or pursuant to the direction or authority of a public agency. As used in this subdivision, “emergency response situation” means instances in which necessary measures are needed in order to prevent injury or death to persons or to prevent, confine, or mitigate damage or destruction to property. (f) Subdivisions (a) and (b) do not apply if the person in the back of the truck or flatbed motortruck is being transported in a parade that is supervised by a law enforcement agency and the speed of the truck while in the parade does not exceed eight miles per hour.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23116, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23116, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 23109 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 23109 provides:

23109. (a) A person shall not engage in a motor vehicle speed contest on a highway. As used in this section, a motor vehicle speed contest includes a motor vehicle race against another vehicle, a clock, or other timing device. For purposes of this section, an event in which the time to cover a prescribed route of more than 20 miles is measured, but where the vehicle does not exceed the speed limits, is not a speed contest. (b) A person shall not aid or abet in any motor vehicle speed contest on any highway. (c) A person shall not engage in a motor vehicle exhibition of speed on a highway, and a person shall not aid or abet in a motor vehicle exhibition of speed on any highway. (d) A person shall not, for the purpose of facilitating or aiding or as an incident to any motor vehicle speed contest or exhibition upon a highway, in any manner obstruct or place a barricade or obstruction or assist or participate in placing a barricade or obstruction upon any highway. (e) (1) A person convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than 24 hours nor more than 90 days or by a fine of not less than three hundred fifty-five dollars ($355) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. That person shall also be required to perform 40 hours of community service. The court may order the privilege to operate a motor vehicle suspended for 90 days to six months, as provided in paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352. The person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle may be restricted for 90 days to six months to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and, if driving a motor vehicle is necessary to perform the duties of the person’s employment, restricted to driving in that person’s scope of employment. This subdivision does not interfere with the court’s power to grant probation in a suitable case. (2) If a person is convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) and that violation proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver, the person convicted shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than 30 days nor more than six months or by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. (f) (1) If a person is convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) for an offense that occurred within five years of the date of a prior offense that resulted in a conviction of a violation of subdivision (a), that person shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than four days nor more than six months, and by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000). (2) If the perpetration of the most recent offense within the five-year period described in paragraph (1) proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver, a person convicted of that second violation shall be imprisoned in a county jail for not less than 30 days nor more than six months and by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000). (3) If the perpetration of the most recent offense within the five-year period described in paragraph (1) proximately causes serious bodily injury, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (f) of Section 243 of the Penal Code, to a person other than the driver, a person convicted of that second violation shall be imprisoned in the state prison, or in a county jail for not less than 30 days nor more than one year, and by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars ($500) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000). (4) The court shall order the privilege to operate a motor vehicle of a person convicted under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) suspended for a period of six months, as provided in paragraph (9) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352. In lieu of the suspension, the person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle may be restricted for six months to necessary travel to and from that person’s place of employment and, if driving a motor vehicle is necessary to perform the duties of the person’s employment, restricted to driving in that person’s scope of employment. (5) This subdivision does not interfere with the court’s power to grant probation in a suitable case. (g) If the court grants probation to a person subject to punishment under subdivision (f), in addition to subdivision (f) and any other terms and conditions imposed by the court, which may include a fine, the court shall impose as a condition of probation that the person be confined in a county jail for not less than 48 hours nor more than six months. The court shall order the person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle to be suspended for a period of six months, as provided in paragraph (9) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352 or restricted pursuant to subdivision (f). (h) If a person is convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) and the vehicle used in the violation is registered to that person, the vehicle may be impounded at the registered owner’s expense for not less than one day nor more than 30 days. (i) A person who violates subdivision (b), (c), or (d) shall upon conviction of that violation be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than 90 days, by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or by both that fine and imprisonment. (j) If a person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle is restricted by a court pursuant to this section, the court shall clearly mark the restriction and the dates of the restriction on that person’s driver’s license and promptly notify the Department of Motor Vehicles of the terms of the restriction in a manner prescribed by the department. The Department of Motor Vehicles shall place that restriction in the person’s records in the Department of Motor Vehicles and enter the restriction on a license subsequently issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles to that person during the period of the restriction. (k) The court may order that a person convicted under this section, who is to be punished by imprisonment in a county jail, be imprisoned on days other than days of regular employment of the person, as determined by the court. (l) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Louis Friend Memorial Act.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 23109, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 23109, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22454 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22454 provides:

22454. (a) The driver of any vehicle, upon meeting or overtaking, from either direction, any schoolbus equipped with signs as required in this code, that is stopped for the purpose of loading or unloading any schoolchildren and displays a flashing red light signal and stop signal arm, as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 25257, if equipped with a stop signal arm, visible from front or rear, shall bring the vehicle to a stop immediately before passing the schoolbus and shall not proceed past the schoolbus until the flashing red light signal and stop signal arm, if equipped with a stop signal arm, cease operation. (b) (1) The driver of a vehicle upon a divided highway or multiple-lane highway need not stop upon meeting or passing a schoolbus that is upon the other roadway. (2) For the purposes of this subdivision, a multiple-lane highway is any highway that has two or more lanes of travel in each direction. (c) (1) If a vehicle was observed overtaking a schoolbus in violation of subdivision (a), and the driver of the schoolbus witnessed the violation, the driver may, within 24 hours, report the violation and furnish the vehicle license plate number and description and the time and place of the violation to the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction of the offense. That law enforcement agency shall issue a letter of warning prepared in accordance with paragraph (2) with respect to the alleged violation to the registered owner of the vehicle. The issuance of a warning letter under this paragraph shall not be entered on the driving record of the person to whom it is issued, but does not preclude the imposition of any other applicable penalty. (2) The Attorney General shall prepare and furnish to every law enforcement agency in the state a form letter for purposes of paragraph (1), and the law enforcement agency may issue those letters in the exact form prepared by the Attorney General. The Attorney General may charge a fee to any law enforcement agency that requests a copy of the form letter to recover the costs of preparing and providing that copy. (d) This section also applies to a roadway upon private property.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22454, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22454, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22451 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22451 provides:

22451. (a) The driver of any vehicle or pedestrian approaching a railroad or rail transit grade crossing shall stop not less than 15 feet from the nearest rail and shall not proceed until he or she can do so safely, whenever the following conditions exist: (1) A clearly visible electric or mechanical signal device or a flagman gives warning of the approach or passage of a train or car. (2) An approaching train or car is plainly visible or is emitting an audible signal and, by reason of its speed or nearness, is an immediate hazard. (b) No driver or pedestrian shall proceed through, around, or under any railroad or rail transit crossing gate while the gate is closed. (c) Whenever a railroad or rail transit crossing is equipped with an automated enforcement system, a notice of a violation of this section is subject to the procedures provided in Section 40518.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22451, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22451, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22450 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22450 provides:

22450. (a) The driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign at the entrance to, or within, an intersection shall stop at a limit line, if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. If there is no limit line or crosswalk, the driver shall stop at the entrance to the intersecting roadway. (b) The driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign at a railroad grade crossing shall stop at a limit line, if marked, otherwise before crossing the first track or entrance to the railroad grade crossing. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local authority may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution providing for the placement of a stop sign at any location on a highway under its jurisdiction where the stop sign would enhance traffic safety.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22450, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22450, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22406 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22406 provides:

22406. No person may drive any of the following vehicles on a highway at a speed in excess of 55 miles per hour: (a) A motortruck or truck tractor having three or more axles or any motortruck or truck tractor drawing any other vehicle. (b) A passenger vehicle or bus drawing any other vehicle. (c) A schoolbus transporting any school pupil. (d) A farm labor vehicle when transporting passengers. (e) A vehicle transporting explosives. (f) A trailer bus, as defined in Section 636.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22406, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22406, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22405 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22405 provides:

22405. (a) No person shall drive a vehicle on any bridge, elevated structure, tube, or tunnel constituting a part of a highway, at a speed which is greater than the maximum speed which can be maintained with safety to such structure. (b) Upon the trial of any person charged with a violation of this section with respect to a sign erected under Section 22404, proof of the determination of the maximum speed by the Department of Transportation or local authority and the erection and maintenance of the speed signs shall constitute prima facie evidence of the maximum speed which can be maintained with safety to the bridge, elevated structure, tube, or tunnel.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22405, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22405, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

A violation of California Vehicle Code Section 22400 is one of the Vehicle Code Sections that can be cited as being the primary collision factor for an auto accident in California. This is true whether the accident only caused injuries or if the accident was a fatal accident which caused one or more fatalities.

California Vehicle Code Section 22400 provides:

22400. (a) No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of a grade, or in compliance with law. No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law. (b) Whenever the Department of Transportation determines on the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that slow speeds on any part of a state highway consistently impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, the department may determine and declare a minimum speed limit below which no person shall drive a vehicle, except when necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected along the part of the highway for which a minimum speed limit is established. Subdivision (b) of this section shall apply only to vehicles subject to registration.

When a Police or CHP Officer, or a Sheriff’s Deputy states in his or her report either that the primary collision factor in an auto accident was one party’s violation of a certain vehicle code section such as the one above, and that one of the parties is at fault for violating that code section, the Officer or Deputy is stating what he or she believes to be the underlying cause of the accident.

If you’ve been injured in an auto, truck, motorcycle, bike, pedestrian or car accident, or if you’ve lost a loved one in a wrongful death vehicle accident, call our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can also e-mail Attorney Sebastian Gibson at SgibsonEsq@aol.com Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website for more information at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com

Sometimes an Officer or Deputy cannot determine with any degree of certainty which party was at fault and will cite two possible Vehicle Code Sections, one for each party in a two-party collision, that may have been violated. In that case, the Police or CHP Officer or Deputy will often state that the primary collision factor is unknown.

Even if there are witnesses to an accident, the Officer of Deputy may discount the statements of some or all of the witnesses if they were friends or relatives of one of the drivers.

Although the conclusion of fault by an officer or deputy does not carry the same weight as a determination of fault by a judge or jury, the importance of the citation of this or any other California code section in the police report is that insurance companies treat the conclusions in these traffic collision reports in a great majority of cases as if the conclusions were written in stone and evaluate a party’s claim based on the findings of fault in these reports.

A traffic collision report may be amended by the police department or the CHP where it contains obvious mistakes, such as when the officer or deputy has mixed up the names of the parties. Supplemental reports are sometimes written when new evidence comes to light, such as when a hit and run party is located. But for the most part, most police departments, Sheriff’s offices and the California Highway Patrol will not amend a report when a party complains and states why he or she doesn’t feel they should have been found at fault for a collision. They will, however, in most cases allow a person to fill out a Counter Report, which, unfortunately simply does not carry much weight with an insurance company.

If the Primary Collision Factor for an accident is unknown, one should look on the traffic collision report to see if the Police or California Highway Patrol Officer or Sheriff’s Deputy cited any “Other Associated Factors” in the traffic collision report as having had a role to play in causing the collision. There may have been faulty equipment, as with some truck accidents, or the roadway itself may have been dangerous.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident in California that has been determined by the investigating Police or CHP Officer or a Sheriff’s Deputy to be the fault of another driver as a result of his or her violation of Vehicle Code Section 22400, call the Law Offices of Sebastian Gibson today at (800) 589-3202.

At the Law Firm of Sebastian Gibson, we specialize in California auto accidents caused by violations of the California Vehicle Code, such as this section 22400, and will represent you to obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries.

In over thirty years of practice, Attorney Sebastian Gibson has obtained millions of dollars in settlements and multiple million dollar or larger settlements. We handle auto accident cases on a contingency fee basis so there is no fee payable unless we win your case and obtain either a settlement, an arbitration, mediation, jury, judge or court award.

Due to how insurance companies treat individuals without an attorney, a person injured in an auto accident will almost always receive a greater amount from a settlement, even after attorneys’ fees, if the case is handled from the start by an experienced and reputable personal injury lawyer.

If you’ve been injured in an auto accident, call to speak with a lawyer at our offices for a free personal injury consultation by phone. You can speak to Attorney Sebastian Gibson by calling (800) 589-3202 or you can e-mail the Sebastian Gibson law firm at SgibsonEsq@aol.com
Additionally, we invite you to visit the Sebastian Gibson law firm website at www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com