Im in IL Can you sue a Car Ins. Policy holder in court? He wasnt the owner or driver.?

Question

Our son who was 18 at the time was driving. My name was on the title with our sons, not my husband. The insurance policy was in My hubands and my name, our son was listed as a driver, but my husband is the only one named in a civil suit seeking 15,000 dollars in damages. The IL statute of Limitations on this accident and claim expires on Nov 13, 2006. Thanks!!!

Answer 1

I work for a law firm in IL and we always name the driver, not the policyholder, but you really should consult an attorney.

Answer 2

If the suit expires on the 13th, and there is no judgment against your husband by that time are you all not in the clear.. Time to take a weeks vacation and don't tell where you went.

Answer 3

out of your description, you had a provide up sign and no point out is made up of one for the %.-up truck so i anticipate there grew to become into none. if so, you have been at fault because of the fact your duty grew to become into not just to provide up and go, yet to pass in a manner that doesn't reason such an accident. His velocity is irrelevant (you advise he grew to become into dashing from the gap your automobile grew to become into shoved) when you consider which you have not any way of proving it wanting an engineer calculating his velocity from the numerous components and that i'm making a guess you heavily isn't pursuing that attitude. So he's theory to have been going the value shrink and for this reason not in part at fault ("contributorily negligent") and for this reason not in charge for any of the damages. So, right here we've an accident for which you're at fault in maximum any court in the land (locate one your mom is a decide for and consistent with hazard, only perhaps...). the people probable injured may be the motive force, any passengers, you, any of your passengers, bystanders, and the owner of the %.-up (when you consider which you broken his assets). I observed no point out of passengers or bystanders and you look to settle for the opportunity of the motive force of the %.-up having a declare nevertheless no point out is made up of that the two as a manner to in basic terms the owner of the %.-up: you broken his assets. the motive force grew to become into not at fault, nevertheless he would desire to sue him besides. (If he did, the motive force could then be waiting to sue you for a similar quantity he grew to become into ordered to pay the owner. you will ought to pay him and he'd ought to pay the owner. however the probability of the motive force suing a buddy or relative is low see you later as his healthful against you succeeds AND he collects.) so which you broken his truck, he sues you, you pay. trouble-free, equitable, and how that's. optimistically for you and him the two you had coverage of an quantity waiting to pay the declare.