Who is Responsible for collisions involving driverless vehicles using AI?

Written By Chris Dolan and Cioffi Remmer

This week’s question comes from Leo from San Francisco, who asks: Now that self-driving cars are becoming a reality, who bears the responsibility for collisions involving driverless vehicles? Are there any laws protecting citizens?

Dear Leo,

Driverless cars, indeed, are becoming a reality. Over the last few years, self-driving vehicles have surged to the forefront of technological innovation, promising to revolutionize how we commute and interact with transportation. Driverless vehicles have undergone significant advancements in testing and production using artificial intelligence (AI), sensor technologies, and cutting-edge computing power. Major automotive industry giants and startups have been competing to bring this transformative technology to the masses, with the Bay Area leading the way.

For example, when companies like Waymo and Cruise test out their driverless taxis on city streets, the question that almost always comes up is, “Who is responsible for collisions involving driverless vehicles?”

Autonomous or driverless vehicles are supposed to have the advantage of obeying all road laws, having more reaction time, and the ability to avoid collisions. However, as of July 10, 2023, the California DMV had received 623 Autonomous Vehicle Collision Reports.  

It is usually the case that technology outpaces legislation. Our legislatures have plenty of time to develop common sense rules and regulations for issues that foreseeably cause public tension. Health and safety are at the heart of most rules and regulations that govern technology and its interactions with the public. This concern would be tenfold in the case of thousand-pound motor vehicles without human control. Currently, in California, Autonomous Vehicles (driverless) are only allowed on public roads for testing purposes.  

The California legislature has attempted to codify some essential regulations for testing driverless vehicles, codified in the California Vehicle Code Section 38750. Imagine a scenario where an autonomous vehicle (AV) collides with another vehicle or pedestrian.  What would they require under California law?

  1. A properly licensed individual must operate the AV. That means there should be a person in the vehicle with a valid driver’s license or a remote operator who monitors the vehicle live if no driver is physically present. That operator must also have a proper, valid driver’s license.
  2. The manufacturer of the AV is required to have a testing permit and insurance in the amount of five million dollars ($5,000,000), of which proof thereof is to be maintained in the vehicle.
  3. A plan with law enforcement agencies and first responders on interacting with the vehicle in emergency and traffic enforcement situations, which includes, but is not limited to, instructions on:
    • How to communicate with the remote operator (who must always be available);
    • Where in the vehicle is the proof of registration and proof of insurance;
    • How to safely remove the vehicle from the roadway;
    • How to disengage autonomous mode.
  4. Once law enforcement arrives, they must follow their plan to interact with Autonomous Vehicles. For example, the San Francisco Police Department has a current directive on interacting with autonomous vehicles. SFPD is required to document both injury and non-injury crashes involving an AV, whether physically operated or remotely monitored, using the CHP555 collision report, which they forward to the Commercial Vehicle Unit. 
  5. Within ten (10) days of the collision, whether it resulted in damage of property or bodily injury or death, the manufacturer must also report the incident to the Department of Motor Vehicles after the collision.  

Ultimately, who is responsible? Like any roadway collision, this is usually determined by figuring out who is at fault. One of the advantages of AVs is that there is audio and video recording at all times, and usually electronic data or telemetry. But determining fault may or may not be as simple as reviewing video or looking at electronic data. In either case, the manufacturer would likely submit the claim to their insurance carrier. If you’re involved in a collision with a driverless vehicle, it is critical to report it to law enforcement and your vehicle insurance carrier. If you’ve been injured in the collision, contact an attorney to help determine your rights.

read more

Cycling Accidents Are on The Rise

Written By Chris Dolan and Anna Pantsulaya

This week’s question comes from Leo from San Francisco, CA, who asks: Since more people are cycling for health, environmental, and many other reasons, how can cyclists lessen their chances of being killed on the road? 

Hi Leo,

That’s a great observation. Each year, the world witnesses an increasing number of cyclists taking to the streets, embracing a sustainable and healthy mode of transportation. However, amidst this surge in popularity, a dark and unsettling reality looms large–the rising number of cyclist deaths. The streets we envisioned as havens for cyclists are turning into danger zones, and we can no longer ignore the devastating consequences. The urgency to address this issue has never been more pressing. Let’s dig into the alarming rise in cyclist deaths and explore the staggering statistics related to cyclist deaths on our roads.

Cycling on the streets, while promoting a healthy and eco-friendly lifestyle, is not without its hazards. Cyclists face numerous dangers that put their lives at risk every time they venture onto the roadways. The lack of designated cycling infrastructure in many cities forces cyclists to share space with motor vehicles, resulting in a constant battle for space and visibility. Inadequate or poorly maintained bike lanes and reckless driving habits increase the chances of collisions and accidents. Additionally, distracted driving, speeding, and a general lack of awareness among motorists about sharing the road with cyclists contribute to the perilous conditions. Unpredictable weather, road conditions, and limited lighting further amplify the risks. The hazards of bicycling on the street are real and demand immediate attention to ensure the safety of cyclists and create a harmonious coexistence between all road users.

According to a recent report from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), in 2021, a staggering 966 cyclists lost their lives in traffic accidents. This unfortunate statistic represents the highest number of cycling fatalities in a single year since 1975. Moreover, it highlights a concerning trend of yearly increases in cycling deaths nationwide. The NHTSA also reports that the number of pedal cyclists injured in traffic crashes reached 41,615 in 2021 – a 7% increase from 2020.

When analyzing data from the NHTSA and the U.S. Census Bureau, it becomes evident that there was an average of 2.7 fatal bicycle crashes for every million U.S. residents between 2017 and 2021. This figure represents a 5% increase compared to 2012-2016. In 2021 alone, cycling fatalities were reported in all 50 states, with more than half of the deaths concentrated in the top five states: Florida, California, Texas, New York, and Arizona.

Ensuring personal safety should be a top priority for cyclists when navigating the roads. By adopting a proactive approach and following essential safety measures, cyclists can greatly reduce the risk of accidents and protect themselves from harm. Firstly, wearing a properly fitted helmet is crucial to safeguarding against head injuries. Additionally, cyclists should invest in reflective clothing and accessories, making themselves more visible to motorists, especially during low-light conditions. Obeying traffic rules and signals is essential, as it helps maintain predictability and enables other road users to anticipate the cyclist’s movements. Staying vigilant and constantly scanning the surroundings for potential hazards is also vital. Regular bike maintenance, including checking brakes, tire pressure, and lights, ensures optimal performance and reduces the likelihood of mechanical failures. Lastly, cyclists should choose routes with dedicated cycling infrastructure, such as bike lanes or paths, to minimize exposure to motor vehicle traffic. By adhering to these safety guidelines, cyclists can significantly enhance their well-being and enjoy a safer riding experience.

When injured in a cycling accident, contacting an attorney is crucial in protecting one’s rights and seeking appropriate compensation. The aftermath of a cycling accident can be physically and emotionally overwhelming and dealing with insurance companies and legal processes can be complex and daunting. By consulting an experienced attorney specializing in personal injury cases, cyclists can gain invaluable guidance and support. An attorney can navigate the legal complexities, investigate the accident, gather evidence, and build a strong case for the injured cyclist. They possess the knowledge and expertise to negotiate with insurance companies, ensuring that victims receive fair and just compensation for medical expenses, property damage, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Moreover, attorneys can provide invaluable advice on interacting with insurance adjusters and help protect victims from potential tactics used to minimize their claims. Ultimately, enlisting the services of an attorney empowers injured cyclists to assert their rights, level the playing field, and obtain the legal recourse they deserve for their injuries and losses. 

With a wealth of expertise in handling cases involving injured cyclists, the legal professionals at The Dolan Law Firm possess extensive experience in this field. If you or a cherished family member have suffered injuries in a cycling accident due to the negligence of another party, we encourage you to approach our skilled attorneys for assistance confidently. Rest assured that our team is well-equipped to provide you with the support and legal representation necessary to seek justice and fair compensation for your circumstances.

For more information on Dolan Law Firm, you can go to Dolanlawfirm.com. To read more articles on our blog, visit us at www.dolanlawfirm.com/blog.

Christopher B. Dolan is the owner of the Dolan Law Firm. Anna Pantsulaya is an associate attorney in our Los Angeles, CA, office. We serve San Francisco Bay Area and California clients from our San Francisco, Oakland, and Los Angeles offices. Email questions and topics for future articles to: help@dolanlawfirm.com. Each situation is different, and this column does not constitute legal advice. We recommend consulting with an experienced trial attorney to understand your rights fully.

read more

Crashes Caused by Police Pursuits: Who is at Fault?

Written By: Chris Dolan and Kimberly Levy

This week’s question comes from Roberto from San Francisco, who asks: Do police officers or police departments have liability for crashes or injuries caused during police pursuits?

Hi Roberto,

It depends on the specific facts involved. There are several sections of the California Government Code as well as the California Vehicle Code that address these kinds of situations. So, let’s look at some fact patterns. Suppose a police officer engages in a vehicle pursuit with a person (also in a motor vehicle) who is suspected of having just robbed a bank and, during the pursuit, the suspected bank robber crashes their car and injures another person who was not involved in the pursuit. In that case, the police officer and their department generally will not be liable for that person’s injuries. California Vehicle Code Section 17004.7(b) is clear in this regard.

But what if the officer crashes their patrol car during a vehicle pursuit and injures a bystander? Let’s say an officer is pursuing a suspected criminal, and during that pursuit, the officer engages in conduct that may be reckless or negligent. Police pursuits are fast-moving situations, requiring officers to make split-second decisions, often with limited or little information. However, the California Vehicle Code requires ALL drivers on the road to operate their vehicles in a safe and reasonable manner, obeying all rules of the road, including police and emergency vehicles. There are exceptions for police pursuits, fire engines on their way to a fire, ambulances taking a critically ill patient to the hospital, etc. But there are requirements for these exceptions, such as operating lights and sirens to warn those in the area that such circumstances are occurring.

If an officer decides to engage in a vehicle pursuit, one can look at whether that decision to pursue was made in a reasonable manner. Generally, the decision to pursue a vehicle affords the officer a certain amount of immunity as they are making that decision in the course and scope of their employment as a police officer. Things can get interesting in examining the officer’s conduct during the pursuit.  

For example, assume an officer in a patrol car is chasing a suspected criminal who is riding a motorcycle. The fleeing suspect on the motorcycle turns into a crowded farmers market with an extremely narrow path of travel down the middle, not enough room for something the size of a car or SUV.  Suppose the officer, seeing the crowded conditions of the farmers market, decides to turn into the crowded area to pursue the fleeing suspect and hits and injures bystanders not involved in the pursuit or crashes into some vendor tents. In that case, that is a decision and an act that most reasonable people would consider negligent. And, if the officer’s actions during the pursuit are considered to be negligent, then that officer and his department will likely have some liability for those injuries and damages resulting from that decision and that conduct.

By contrast, assume the same fact pattern, but the officer does NOT pursue the fleeing motorcycle into the crowded farmer’s market. He instead radios dispatch for backup and informs them of the suspect’s last known location. But then the motorcyclist crashes while speeding through the crowded marketplace and injures bystanders and causes property damage. Because the officer acted in a manner that most people would consider reasonable, it is unlikely that the officer or the department would be liable for those injuries or damages. Once again, the California Vehicle Code Section mentioned above would control.

In answering these questions regarding police pursuits, courts will generally break the pursuit into sections and examine each section and decision made. An officer can have acted reasonably in some sections of a police pursuit but negligently in others.

read more

Trial By Jury: An American Institution

Written By Christopher B. Dolan

This week’s question comes from Frank T. in the Mission District: I got a jury summons in the mail. Why do I keep getting them? I don’t want to sit on a jury and take time away from work. 

Frank,

I know this is a sentiment shared by many right now. The right to trial by a jury of one’s peers is enshrined in the Bill of Rights that was formed at the time of the birth of our Nation. When The Colonies were under British rule, citizens had no right to have members of their community decide their fate.  Justice had become politicized, and it was administered pursuant to British law, and as a manner of repression, as the colonists were considered British subjects. British law was often unjust and unfair to the Colonists and failed to recognize the realities of living in the New World. This was one of the many injustices that spurned the birth of our Democracy. Trial by jury was, and largely remains, an American institution with most countries not offering jury trials to their citizens.

The right to trial by jury was established under and through the Seventh Amendment to the Bill of Rights.  As such it was one of the original rights for which a war was fought, blood was spent, and lives were sacrificed. The right to trial by jury is also guaranteed by Section 16, of Article One, of the California Constitution.  

What was once considered a fundamental right and honor is now perceived by many as an annoying and disruptive inconvenience. Not to minimize the impact that you feel jury service has upon your personal circumstances, too many of us now take for granted our democratic freedoms, rights and responsibilities. Jury service is an apolitical right and in today’s environment where the courts have become more politicized, the fact that a jury pool is drawn from a broad cross-section of our community is perhaps one of the most apolitical aspects of our Democracy.  

As your name, Frank, suggests that your pronoun is male, and you reference your spouse with the pronoun he, I deduce that you are in a same sex marriage. (If my assumption is incorrect, please forgive me.) I want to put this into some perspective: imagine if you or your husband were accused of a crime, were the victim of a hate crime, or been deprived a civil right based upon your sexual orientation. If you lived in another state, not as progressive as California, the judge might be an elected or appointed official who is homophobic, or against gay marriage, and she/he would be the sole decisionmaker on your case. That prejudice could very well affect the outcome of your case and be demoralizing. Likewise, no members of the LGBTQIA+ community to heed the call to jury service, you would not receive a jury of your peers.  

No one knows the case you have been summoned for as of now. Jurors are randomly selected from DMV records, voting rolls and other public sources of information and, until the day you show up at the courthouse, there is no way to know what type of trial, or what type of issue, is involved. In San Francisco, if you are summoned to 400 McCallister Street chances are that it is a civil trial involving disputes between two parties, two businesses, or an individual seeking justice against much more powerful interests such as corporations and/or the government. If you are summoned to 850 Bryant Street, it is most likely a criminal case.  

Since COVID began, I have tried cases to verdict, one in September 2021 against a police department and officer where there was a claim of unlawful and excessive use of force resulting in a shooting and one against an insurance company for injuries suffered in a collision. I selected juries, presented the facts, and received verdicts in favor of my clients who otherwise would never have received justice. Had jurors not shown up, my clients would never have had their chance to receive fair and impartial justice. We would never have been able to stand up to the police and, quite possibly, given the judge and venue in another state, we would not even have had a chance, much less won.

The right to trial by jury is already threatened by big monied interests that don’t want trial lawyers like me to balance the power dynamics. Organizations which I am proud to be a member of, such as the American Association of Justice, and the Consumer Attorneys of California, fight diligently and help preserve the right to trial by jury.  

Many jurors, originally reluctant, after serving their jury service are glad they did it. They feel proud of being a group of twelve (or six in Federal Court) who participated. I hope you take the call to service and have a meaningful experience. Lastly, just because you are called for jury duty doesn’t mean you will serve. Many times, jurors are not needed as a case gets resolved or settled. Even if you are called into court, most jurors do not get selected, as often more jurors are called then end up being needed.

I hope this helps you see things in a different light. Without Jurors, the light of democracy dims remarkably.  

read more

Can Technology Solve the DUI Problem?

Written By Chris Dolan and Jeremy Jessup

This week’s question comes from Annie from Oakland, who asks: I recently read an article about the Simmons family out of Louisiana, their tragedy, and how the family is taking steps to educate teenagers about the perils of drinking and driving. That story, coupled with the fact that the July 4th holiday is upon us, had me thinking; with all the advancement of technology, why are there still drunk drivers on the road, and is July 4th the most dangerous day to drive?

Thank you for raising this question.

I, too, have read about the Simmons family, their loss, and their attempts to raise awareness. Unfortunately, their story is not as unique as it should be. Drunk driving remains a significant problem throughout the country, and certain days are more dangerous on the roads than others. 

Alcohol-related crashes are responsible for 30% of all U.S. traffic deaths, and in 2020, the most recent year data is available, was responsible for killing more than 11,000 people on the roads. That number has gone up by 14% since 2019, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

MoneyGeek recently posted findings from an analysis they performed. They analyzed historical data from the U.S. Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to forecast 2023’s most dangerous days, weeks, and holidays for driving under the influence (DUI) in the United States.

Their key findings were as follows:

  • MoneyGeek forecasts 13,490 DUI fatalities in 2023.
  • The historical trend of DUI fatalities that drives the forecast has increased. 2021’s DUI fatalities are 23% higher than 2016’s and are at levels not seen since 2003.
  • Summer will account for 28% of drunk driving-related fatalities, making it the deadliest season.
  • The week of July 4th is forecasted to be the deadliest in 2023, with 311 expected fatalities.
  • On New Year’s Day, drunk driving-related deaths spiked 117%, making it the most dangerous holiday for drunk driving.
  • 60% of drunk driving-related fatalities happen on the weekends (Friday through Sunday).

According to MoneyGeek’s analysis, drunk driving incidents are prevalent every day of the week, but certain seasons bring out more than usual. For example, 28% of DUI-related deaths are projected to happen in the summer of 2023. Fall is close behind summer, coming in with 27%. Spring has 24% of DUI incidents, and winter, with 21%, is the least likely season to be involved in a DUI-related fatal collision.

The top five riskiest holidays for drunk driving are:

  1. New Year’s Day
  2. July 4th
  3. Thanksgiving
  4. Labor Day
  5. Memorial Day

As mentioned above, the likelihood of a drunk driver causing a fatal collision on New Year’s Day is 117% higher than on any other day of the week or season. Unlike other holidays, where festivities may last several days, New Year’s only lasts one night, with people returning home in the early hours of the following day. 

Based on MoneyGeek’s figures, July 4th is in a distant second position compared to New Year’s Day. On July 4th, your chances of encountering drunk drivers are 77% higher than the norm. With a risk of 55% higher than the trend, Thanksgiving is the third most hazardous holiday.

Labor Day is the fourth most risky holiday for drunk driving (54%), and Memorial Day is the fifth most risky holiday (51% more than average). On Christmas Day, fewer people tend to leave their homes; therefore, the likelihood of running into a drunk driver is 9% higher than usual.

Given the high rate of fatalities, which seems only to be rising, the question becomes, what is being done about this? Heather Geronemus, chair of the board for MADD, “believes that technology will ultimately solve the problem of drunk driving. We are working on Capitol Hill to support legislation such as the RIDE Act and HALT Act, which would direct the Department of Transportation to require new cars to have advanced technology to detect and stop drunk drivers.” She is not too far off.

Buried deep on Page 135 of a $1 trillion spending bill signed by President Biden in 2021 is a provision that by 2026, all new vehicles sold in the U.S. must have a system that will immobilize the vehicle, when drivers are under the influence of alcohol and if they are drunk. 

There’s only one issue: technology doesn’t exist for a widely used commercial application yet. As reported by Automotive News, the technology to passively detect if drivers may be drunk could be years away. However, efforts are underway to offer the tech as soon as possible. 

Asahi Kasei, a Japanese chemical and electronics company, may be closest to presenting a solution. They have had a Swedish subsidiary working on alcohol detection sensors for other applications for some time, according to AutoNews. This technology would automatically test a driver’s breath for alcohol and stop a vehicle from moving if the driver is impaired.

“To be honest, I think it took everybody by surprise, not only in our company but at all the OEMs and Tier 1’s that this legislation appeared,” Mike Franchy, North American director of supplier Asahi Kasei told Automotive News. 

Another company is working on a technology that could test a person’s blood alcohol level through their fingers. Again, this technology is far off.

As of now, it appears that auto manufacturers are trying their best to meet the 2026 timeline. However, even if the technology is there, it will take time to implement and cycle through the new cars. Hopefully, one day there will be no more articles to read like that of the Simmons family or for articles such as this to be written. 

read more