Lewisville: Need a good traffic attorney

[Nash B.]

I had a CDL, that's why I used the aforementioned lawyers.

[Pro88LX]

People usually get over when they see red and blues don't they? I guess it is just me they do that for.

Do you think they have enough time to safely get over with you coming up on them at over 50 mph faster than them?

BTW dont you have some crack to plant on someone or something

[jefehbk]

You need to look up gross negligence before you pretend to know what you are writing about.

If the judge said anything more than 85mph he wouldn't do probation and a girl right in front of me was clocked at 86mph, he let her slide with max fine and defensive driving, but decided he wouldn't do that for me because I was going 11mph faster? Yeah, great discretion.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Negligence (disambiguation).

Gross negligence is a legal concept which means serious carelessness. Negligence is the opposite of diligence, or being careful. The standard of ordinary negligence is what conduct one expects from the proverbial "reasonable person". By analogy, if somebody has been grossly negligent, that means they have fallen so far below the ordinary standard of care that one can expect, to warrant the label of being "gross".

from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...oss+negligence
an indifference to, and a blatant violation of, a legal duty with respect to the rights of others.

Gross negligence is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both. It is conduct that is extreme when compared with ordinary Negligence, which is a mere failure to exercise reasonable care. Ordinary negligence and gross negligence differ in degree of inattention, while both differ from willful and wanton conduct, which is conduct that is reasonably considered to cause injury. This distinction is important, since contributory negligence—a lack of care by the plaintiff that combines with the defendant's conduct to cause the plaintiff's injury and completely bar his or her action—is not a defense to willful and wanton conduct but is a defense to gross negligence. In addition, a finding of willful and wanton misconduct usually supports a recovery of Punitive Damages, whereas gross negligence does not.


seems like gross negligence makes sense to me....at 27mph you were far below the ordinary standard of care.

[quikag]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Negligence (disambiguation).

Gross negligence is a legal concept which means serious carelessness. Negligence is the opposite of diligence, or being careful. The standard of ordinary negligence is what conduct one expects from the proverbial "reasonable person". By analogy, if somebody has been grossly negligent, that means they have fallen so far below the ordinary standard of care that one can expect, to warrant the label of being "gross".

from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...oss+negligence
an indifference to, and a blatant violation of, a legal duty with respect to the rights of others.

Gross negligence is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both. It is conduct that is extreme when compared with ordinary Negligence, which is a mere failure to exercise reasonable care. Ordinary negligence and gross negligence differ in degree of inattention, while both differ from willful and wanton conduct, which is conduct that is reasonably considered to cause injury. This distinction is important, since contributory negligence—a lack of care by the plaintiff that combines with the defendant's conduct to cause the plaintiff's injury and completely bar his or her action—is not a defense to willful and wanton conduct but is a defense to gross negligence. In addition, a finding of willful and wanton misconduct usually supports a recovery of Punitive Damages, whereas gross negligence does not.


seems like gross negligence makes sense to me....at 27mph you were far below the ordinary standard of care.

If I am convicted of doing 27 over, then it could potentially be negligence, not anywhere close to gross negligence. Trust me, I know the difference as we had a major lawsuit to deal with at our company that I spent many hours working with the attorneys to differentiate between gross neg and ordinary neg.

An example one of the attorneys explained to me is negligence is talking or texting on your phone and you blow a red light and hit somebody and kill them. Gross negligence would be snorting a line of coke on the dashboard with a stripper in your lap, seeing the red light, and flooring it for the hell of it, crashing into a car and killing someone.

If you think my ALLEGED 97mph or whatever it was passing a few cars that were doing up to 80mph or more on 121 tollroad is gross negligence, then I don't know what else to say.

[Pro88LX]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Negligence (disambiguation).

Gross negligence is a legal concept which means serious carelessness. Negligence is the opposite of diligence, or being careful. The standard of ordinary negligence is what conduct one expects from the proverbial "reasonable person". By analogy, if somebody has been grossly negligent, that means they have fallen so far below the ordinary standard of care that one can expect, to warrant the label of being "gross".

from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...oss+negligence
an indifference to, and a blatant violation of, a legal duty with respect to the rights of others.

Gross negligence is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both. It is conduct that is extreme when compared with ordinary Negligence, which is a mere failure to exercise reasonable care. Ordinary negligence and gross negligence differ in degree of inattention, while both differ from willful and wanton conduct, which is conduct that is reasonably considered to cause injury. This distinction is important, since contributory negligence—a lack of care by the plaintiff that combines with the defendant's conduct to cause the plaintiff's injury and completely bar his or her action—is not a defense to willful and wanton conduct but is a defense to gross negligence. In addition, a finding of willful and wanton misconduct usually supports a recovery of Punitive Damages, whereas gross negligence does not.


seems like gross negligence makes sense to me....at 27mph you were far below the ordinary standard of care.

i think you're REALLY stretching......

As a member of the public, i feel safer with someone cruising at 97 in a 70 in a sports car designed for high speed travel than barney fife going 120 in a 70 (while weaving in and out of traffic) in a car originally designed to get ethyl safely to bingo.

[paul_376]

Pay your ticket and slow down! 97 seriously?

[Pro88LX]

If you think my ALLEGED 97mph or whatever it was passing a few cars that were doing up to 80mph or more on 121 tollroad is gross negligence, then I don't know what else to say.

id say more like 90. i know i gave been doing 85-90 on there and barely keeping with the flow of traffic.

[Nash B.]

The moral of the story: gross negligence is more fun than ordinary negligence.

[BradM]

The moral of the story: gross negligence is more fun than ordinary negligence.

Also, if you are fortunate enough to be a corvette pilot, you're excused from speed limits.

[Nash B.]

Or if you drive a Crown Vic with special tires, you're good up to at least 120.

[564826]

Or if you drive a Crown Vic with special tires, you're good up to at least 120.

Not just special tires but COP tires.

[jefehbk]

i think you're REALLY stretching......

As a member of the public, i feel safer with someone cruising at 97 in a 70 in a sports car designed for high speed travel than barney fife going 120 in a 70 (while weaving in and out of traffic) in a car originally designed to get ethyl safely to bingo.

I wont argue if its stretching or not since Im not an attorney....but i would not feel safer with someone cruising at 97 in a 70 in a sports car. mainly because you probably dont know who that someone is and i just would not trust that "someone" further than i could throw a sportscar. no telling who that someone is, what state of mind they are in, how good are their driving skills, etc.

[quikag]

I wont argue if its stretching or not since Im not an attorney....but i would not feel safer with someone cruising at 97 in a 70 in a sports car. mainly because you probably dont know who that someone is and i just would not trust that "someone" further than i could throw a sportscar. no telling who that someone is, what state of mind they are in, how good are their driving skills, etc.

Same goes for a cop driving 120mph. What is his state of mind, how good are his driving skills, how good is his equipment (car/tires, etc.)

Again, not condoning a 97 in a 70, whether I was going that fast or not, I just cannot have it on my record without trying to fight it. It's that simple.

[BradM]

Why are you so worried about it going on your record?

[danielhv]

Same goes for a cop driving 120mph. What is his state of mind, how good are his driving skills, how good is his equipment (car/tires, etc.)

lol, alot better than a complete strangers. As mentioned above, police officers are trained to do just that. And practice their skills as part of re-current training. His equipment is maintained to a specified standard. None of which some jackass in a sports car can say.

Face it, you cannot sit there and say yea, I was speeding, but so was the cop that was trying to catch me! lol. Gimme a break. It doesn't matter what speed he used to catch up to you. He made the discretion to use whatever speed he felt necessary considering the factors. And that is a right he has as a law enforcement officer. Just as they have the ability to decide NOT to persue someone because it endangers more peoples safety under certain conditions/circumstances.

Whats next? You going to bitch cause an officer ran a red light while responding to a call? lolz