The truck had no insurance, thus by state law should not have been occupying that particular set of space-time coordinates when she rear-ended it. Had the truck driver been obeying the law, then this particular accident would have never happened. That’s not to say that she might not have gotten into a different accident, just not this one.
It doesn't work that way. Sure, the truck should have been insured, but if the driver of the truck was not a fault, it does not make the owner or driver of the truck responsible for the accident.
“The truck had no insurance, thus by state law should not have been occupying that particular set of space-time coordinates when she rear-ended it. Had the truck driver been obeying the law, then this particular accident would have never happened. That’s not to say that she might not have gotten into a different accident, just not this one.”
This might actually have some merit from a legalistic point of view. But one idea from the Arab world that I find attractive, actually an old idea, was that judges should be the wisest persons available. An Arab court would probably throw this out immediately, and additionally have the attorney who actually submitted this lawsuit and the driver without insurance both whipped.
The CAR DIDN'T HAVE A LEGAL DRIVER, thus by state law should not have been occupying that particular set of space-time coordinates when she rear-ended the truck. Had the CAR DRIVER been obeying the law, then this particular accident would have never happened. That’s not to say that she might not have gotten into a different accident, just not this one.
There, that makes more sense.
There was a thread on this case about a month ago. If I remember correctly, it was the company the driver worked for which failed to keep the insurance up to date—I don’t know if he even realized that his employer was dropping the ball.