• Summary judgment was granted in favor of the middle driver defendant because the evidence demonstrated that the middle vehicle came to a complete stop before being pushed into plaintiff’s vehicle by the third vehicle in line.
  • March 1, 2018
  • Gibson v. Metro. Grp. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 Del. Super. LEXIS 584 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 15, 2017)

    The plaintiff testified that her vehicle was struck twice from behind. The driver of the vehicle directly behind hers testified that he was at a complete stop when he was rear-ended and pushed into the plaintiff’s vehicle. The driver of the last vehicle in line agreed that the middle vehicle was at a complete stop. The driver of the middle vehicle moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff presented no evidence that he did not stop before his vehicle struck her. The plaintiff countered that evidence of two separate impacts was enough to defeat summary judgment. The court granted the motion and found there was no evidence the middle vehicle driver acted negligently before his vehicle struck the plaintiff’s car. The court also found that a reasonable jury could not infer the middle vehicle driver struck the plaintiff’s vehicle first or that he acted negligently.