Cause and Contributing Factors in Traffic Accidents

8/10/2019 Cause and Contributing Factors in Traffic Accidents

1/4

Cause and Contributing Factors in Traffic AccidentsBy By James O. Harris

Get notified

about new articles -

join theExpertPages

Mailing List now

Enter your email

When the facts are against you, argue the law;

When the law is against you, argue the facts.

he abo!e is o"ten #uote$ to aspiring attorneys. o success"ully argue the "acts o" a case%

the a$!ocate must un$erstan$ their contribution to the proximate cause o" an issue an$

the "actors lea$ing to a result. his is one reason there are expert witnesses. &ew trialswoul$ be complete without expert testimony.

he ultimate goal o" a tra""ic acci$ent in!estigation or reconstruction is to $etermine the

e!ents o" the acci$ent% or what cause$ the acci$ent. here are many publications a!ailable

on the subject o" cause as cause is the heart o" the issue at trial. he subject matter can becomplex since there are so many circumstances an$ "actors that must be consi$ere$ in a

cause analysis. here is also the matter o" what $oes 'cause' mean(

One pit"all a reconstructionist% or an attorney% "aces is $e"ining 'cause.' )s most o" the

reconstructionist*s wor+ in!ol!es the legal pro"ession% a common un$erstan$ing o" thelegal term will be use"ul to pre!ent con"usion.

,ause in law is $i""erent "rom cause in the rest o" the worl$. n the eyes o" the courts%

cause is an issue o" policy an$ not an instrument o" "actual analysis. he issue "or the

court is whether% as a policy $ecision% a $e"en$ant shoul$ be hel$ liable "or injuries or$amages. n a tra""ic acci$ent case% the resolution o" that issue $epen$s on whether the

crash was a "oreseeable result o" a $e"en$ant*s negligence or will"ul act.

his soun$s contrary to that which is taught to police o""icers% tra""ic homici$e

in!estigators an$ acci$ent reconstructionists. he wor+ o" the acci$ent in!estigator ispreliminary to the analysis per"orme$ by the jury. he jury is boun$ to consi$er the

e!i$ence an$ will consi$er the #uality an$ completeness o" the analyst*s presentation in

coming to a conclusion. Put another way% the juror is not constraine$ to the sameprinciples o" "actual analysis as is the in!estigator.

Many juris$ictions hol$ that any e!ent that was a substantial "actor in causing a harm"ul

e!ent is a legally rele!ant proximate cause o" the e!ent e!en i" other things were also

substantial "actors an$ there"ore concurring proximate causes o" that e!ent. his $oes not


2/4

mean a law !iolation must be construe$ as a causati!e "actor in an acci$ent. &or example%

a !ehicle*s registration may ha!e expire$ but this woul$ not be relati!e to the !ehicle

being in!ol!e$ in a collision although it is a !iolation. Many tra""ic laws exist solely togo!ern the sa"e mo!ement o" tra""ic on the highways stop signs% lane $i!ision% spee$

limits% etc.% an$ may concur with an acci$ent "actor that existe$. &or the police o""icer% it

is con!enient to match a law !iolation with a 'cause' but this practice o"ten results inerrors as it ten$s to ignore other existing "actors that may ha!e been present an$ were

e#ually contributing to an acci$ent.

) common law !iolation that is consi$ere$ a mo$i"ier o" the human "actor is intoxication.

)ssume a !ehicle is stoppe$ at a stop sign. he $ri!er is legally intoxicate$. His car isstruc+ in the rear en$ by another !ehicle. he "act that the $ri!er o" the lea$ !ehicle is

intoxicate$ is not a "actor in this acci$ent but the law !iolation is present. His

per"ormance $i$ not contribute to the e!ent. /hen $etermining intoxication as a "actor inan acci$ent% the e""ect o" the le!el o" intoxication in the human per"ormance "actor nee$s

to be #uanti"ie$. &or example% i" a $ri!er was not intoxicate$% woul$ the acci$ent still

ha!e occurre$(

Outsi$e the courtroom an$ in "actual analysis% cause is whate!er is re#uire$ to pro$uce aresult. ) case normally consists o" a combination o" "actors% circumstances or con$itions

that must be present to pro$uce the result. ,onsi$er a cigarette lighter. &or a "lame to be

pro$uce$% there must be "uel% a "lint% a stri+ing sur"ace this is "ree o" moisture an$someone to actuate the mechanism. a+e out any o" these circumstances an$ the lighter

will not pro$uce a "lame. 0ot only must these circumstances be present% they must be

present simultaneously. n this example% it is a simple matter to "in$ one circumstance

that must be present to pro$uce the result% such as the "uel% but in other situations the"actors may be $i""icult to i$enti"y.

/hen circumstances or con$itions exist simultaneously% the $egree o" each con$ition may

be important. ,onsi$er two $ri!ers% 1mith an$ Jones. 1mith% with better !isual acuity% cansee better in $im light than Jones. 2ri!ing along a $ar+ country roa$% without hea$lights%

neither $ri!er can see a pe$estrian wal+ing along the si$e o" the roa$. /ith high beam

hea$lights% both 1mith an$ Jones can see the pe$estrian. /ith low beam hea$lights%

1mith can see the pe$estrian but not Jones. High beams allow Jones% e!en with his poorer!isual capacity% to see the pe$estrian as can 1mith. But Jones cannot see as well as 1mith

un$er the same circumstances e!en though the en!ironmental con$itions were i$entical.

)n analysis o" an acci$ent in!ol!ing Jones an$ the pe$estrian woul$ inclu$e trying to$etermine whether it was $ue to poor !isual acuity or insu""icient lighting con$itions. "

three or more con$itions interrelate% the e!aluation o" the circumstances becomes

consi$erably more complex.

,on$itions an$ e!ents are closely interrelate$ when consi$ering acci$ent "actors. 1omemay be ob!ious an$ others $i""icult to $etermine. " a large truc+ is in!ol!e$ in an

acci$ent an$ the "uel tan+ is rupture$% the cause o" the rupture an$ resulting "uel spill% is

rea$ily $etermine$. " the "uel was to ignite% the cause o" the ignition may bein$eterminate but subject to speculation.


3/4

) '"actor' is a circumstance contributing to a result. /ithout this "actor% the result woul$

not exist but the "actor alone is an element that% by itsel"% cannot pro$uce the result. he

term 'contributing "actor' is meaningless i" this $e"inition is accepte$. ) "actor must becontributing i" it is present otherwise it is not a "actor. he term 'primary "actor' is

sometimes use$ by experts to in$icate a "actor that was strong in its contribution to the

acci$ent. his is mislea$ing as there can be no one "actor more important than any otheri" all "actors must ha!e been present to pro$uce a result. 0o "actor can be secon$ary% or

less important than another i" all are re#uire$ "or the result. Li+e the lin+s o" a chain% all

must be present an$ none is more or less necessary than the other.

,onsi$er a roa$ with a sharp cur!e. One year% 34%444 cars sa"ely negotiate the cur!e.2uring the same year% 54 cars "aile$ to negotiate the cur!e an$ crashe$. /hat was the

cause o" the acci$ents( " it is accepte$ that the sharp cur!e was the cause% then all the

cars tra!eling on this roa$ woul$ ha!e ha$ an acci$ent. t may well be a "actor% butcertainly not the sole circumstance in existence that precipitate$ the acci$ents. )

combination o" "actors% spee$% $ri!er capability% !ehicle con$ition an$ en!ironmental

con$itions all come into play.

n a two car hea$-on collision% multiple "actors again come into "ocus. /hy was one$ri!er le"t o" center( /as it a problem o" perception( Or attitu$e( /hy $i$ the other

$ri!er not ta+e e!asi!e action( 2i$ a passenger not warn the $ri!er o" the impen$ing

ha6ar$( s there roa$ $esign $e"ect( ) "ailure to properly mar+% sign or maintain the roa$(Ob!iously% many #uestions are not a$$resse$ an$ will not be answere$ by a police o""icer

"illing in bloc+s on a stan$ar$ acci$ent report "orm.

)ctors "all into three primary areas7 roa$% !ehicle an$ human. Each area is subject to a

!ariety o" mo$i"iers. &or instance% roa$ "actors inclu$e% but are not limite$ to lighting%

!iew obstructions% recogni6ability% signs% signals% sur"ace character% $imensions an$protecti!e $e!ices. )ll "actors are subject to mo$i"ication by outsi$e in"luences such as

the roa$ sur"ace that becomes slic+ "rom rain"all. Mo$i"ying each o" the liste$ roa$"actors are weather% lighting% roa$si$e $e!ices% acti!ities% sur"ace $eposits% $amage%

$eterioration an$ age.

&or !ehicles% "actors inclu$e e#uipment con$ition% !iew obstructions% $istractions%

instruments% signaling $e!ices% control sensation% com"ort% automatic controls an$$e!ices% weight% per"ormance% $imensions an$ stability. 8ehicle spee$% as a "actor% must

exist. " neither !ehicle ha$ any spee$% there coul$ not ha!e been a collision.

Human "actors are without $oubt the most complex an$ $i""icult to isolate as they are

almost all !ery temporary in nature. /hat existe$ at the time o" the acci$ent may notexist moments later. ,onsi$er sensory capabilities% +nowle$ge% ju$gment% attitu$e%

alertness% health% $ri!ing s+ill% age% customs% habits% weight% strength an$ "ree$om o"

mo!ement. O" these% the emotional "actors are the greatest !ariable attributes an$ themost $i""icult to i$enti"y. hey are also subject to the most mo$i"ication with the least

remaining e!i$ence.


4/4

9emote con$ition "actors may be consi$ere$ when $ealing with cause analysis although

they are sel$om o" signi"icance to the in!estigator on a single acci$ent case. 9emote

con$ition "actors may in!ol!e a changing cultural climate in which the "actors an$ theirmo$i"iers "orm. his inclu$es moral in"luences% religion% belie"s% legal in"luence an$

!alues on !ehicle $esigners% highway engineers% $ri!ers an$ pe$estrians.

n most reconstructions pre"orme$ "or ci!il litigation% collision a!oi$ance is an issue.

Much o" this analysis "alls un$er a category o" pre$isposing circumstances. 1ome o" thesecircumstances can be controlle$ by the in$i!i$ual. n small amounts% alcohol in the

bloo$stream may ha!e little e""ect on a $ri!er*s capabilities. n larger #uantities% the e""ect

can be $ramatic an$ greatly increase the chances o" an acci$ent. ) $ri!er may be expose$to a pre$isposing circumstance% such as consuming mo$erate amounts o" alcohol be"ore

$ri!ing "or many years an$ ne!er ha!e an acci$ent. t is only when this circumstance is

combine$ with other circumstances that the "ull e""ect o" the pre$isposing circumstancebecomes e!i$ent. Other pre$isposing circumstances% li+e $ri!ing in a rainstorm% can be

a!oi$e$ by trip planning.

2etermining all the "actors that were present in any single acci$ent woul$ be a

monumental un$erta+ing. /ith human "oibles% none will e!er be complete or accurate.here are simply too many "actors% mo$i"iers an$ circumstances present that may ha!e

$isappeare$ long be"ore the in!estigator becomes in!ol!e$. Other circumstances may

simply ne!er be re!eale$% or reali6e$% by the parties in!ol!e$. he examination o" manyacci$ents at one location may re!eal a single% uni#ue circumstance common to all

acci$ents there. his is use"ul in isolating a "actor not rea$ily obser!able in a single case.

he essential test "or proximate cause is the acci$ent must be the natural an$ probable

result o" a negligent act or omission an$ be o" such a character as an or$inarily pru$ent

person ought to ha!e "oreseen it as li+ely to occur as a result o" the action. t is notessential that the person charge$ with the negligence shoul$ ha!e "oreseen the precise

injury "rom his action.

his $e"inition ma+es the wor+ o" the acci$ent analyst an$ a$!ocate easier in that not allthe "actors present in an acci$ent may be su""iciently rele!ant to the cause "or

consi$eration. Mere presence is insu""icient% it must ha!e in some signi"icant way

contribute$ to the result. )s such% there are se!eral "actors that are routinely i$enti"ie$ asbeing substantially contributing an$ others are accepte$ or implie$ as being present an$

normally expecte$. n a case where a !ehicle "alls or "lips% gra!ity is a "actor an$ its

existence is accepte$. his $oes not relie!e the analyst o" the responsibility o" being

aware o" the presence o" a$$itional "actors because in any case any one o" them may becritical in $etermining proximate cause.

/ith a goo$ un$erstan$ing o" the relationships o" acci$ent "actors% circumstances an$

mo$i"iers% an$ su""icient $ata% an acci$ent can be analy6e$% causation $etermine$ an$ theconclusions e""ecti!ely presente$.

Documents

Cause and Contributing Factors in Traffic Accidents