Entering and intersection, I struck another car at an intersection. I did not see the other car. But the other car had the stop sign. There was substantial damage to my car. I was badly injured. What are my rights?

If you are traveling through an intersection and two vehicles collide, determining who is at fault might seem straightforward. This is especially true if the other driver had a stop sign. However, New York personal injury law evaluates these accidents through a specific set of rules established by the Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL).

If you were injured in an intersection collision, understanding how New York courts define “right of way” and “driver duties” is critical. This knowledge helps protect your claim.

The No-Fault Claim vs. Personal Injury Claim

Following an accident, you generally have two paths for recovery under New York law:

  • No-Fault Insurance Claim. Regardless of who caused the accident, your first step is filing a claim with your own car insurance company. Under New York’s no-fault system, this covers basic economic losses—such as medical bills and a portion of your lost wages—up to limit thresholds. You must file these benefits within 30 days of the accident.
  • Personal Injury Lawsuit. If you sustained a “serious injury” (as defined by NY Insurance Law § 5102(d)), you have the right to file a lawsuit against the at-fault driver to recover compensation for pain and suffering, excess economic loss, and other damages.

To win a personal injury lawsuit, you must prove the other driver was negligent. In intersection accidents, this proof relies heavily on statutory violations. It also relies on common-law duties.

Entering an Intersection: the Duty to Stop and Yield (VTL §§ 1172 and 1142)

A driver approaching a stop sign faces two distinct legal obligations:

  • The Duty to Stop (VTL § 1172). A driver must come to a complete stop at a clearly marked stop line, before entering the crosswalk, or at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where they have a view of approaching traffic.
  • The Duty to Yield (VTL § 1142(a)). Stopping is not enough. Once stopped, the driver must yield the right of way to any vehicle that has already entered the intersection, or that is approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard.

The Right-of-Way Driver’s Right to Assume Safe Passage

If you were the driver on the through highway (the road without the stop sign), New York law recognizes your right to assume other motorists will follow the rules.

You are entitled to anticipate that a driver facing a stop sign will stop and yield the right of way. Friedberg v Citiwide Auto Leasing, Inc., 22 AD3d 522, 801 NYS2d 770 (2d Dept 2005). Furthermore, New York case law establishes that a driver with the right of way has no duty to watch for and avoid a driver who might fail to stop or proceed with due caution at a stop sign. Aunchman v Palen, 186 AD2d 104, 587 NYS2d 710 (2d Dept 1992); Perez v Brux Cab Corp., 251 AD2d 157, 674 NYS2d 343 (1st Dept 1998).

The “Duty to See” and the Obstruction Excuse

A common defense in intersection accidents is that the at-fault driver’s view of the intersection was blocked by parked cars, trees, or bad weather.

However, New York law holds drivers to a strict standard. Every driver is charged with a common-law duty to see what is there to be seen by the proper use of their senses.

If a driver claims their view was obstructed, they are still under a duty to use extreme caution. The fact that a motorist’s view was obscured does not exculpate them from their failure to yield the right of way. Olsen v Baker, 112 AD2d 510, 490 NYS2d 916 (38d Dept 1985). They must wait to proceed until they can safely verify that no immediate hazards are approaching.

As with all accident cases, there could be two sides to the story. A recurring theme in all negligence cases is the duty of everyone (pedestrian or driver) to see what there is to be seen. Or as one appellate court said, a driver cannot “blindly and wantonly” enter into an intersection. Gilkerson v Buck, 167 AD3d 1470, 90 NYS3d 750 (4th Dept 2018).

The Duty to Take Evasive Action

While you have the right to assume others will obey stop signs, this right is not absolute.

There could be situations where the driver with the stop sign has the right of away. So if the driver with the stop sign already entered the intersection before the driver who did not have a stop sign, then the driver with the stop sign has the right of way. Especially where the driver with the stop sign testifies that the driver without the stop sign was traveling at an excessive rate of speed. In this case, if the driver with the stop sign did not see the other vehicle, the right of way applies. Nevarez v S.R.M. Management Corp., 58 AD3d 295, 867 NYS2d 431 (1st Dept 2008); see Rivera v Berrios Trans Service Inc., 64 AD3d 416, 882 NYS2d 114 (1st Dept 2009).

All drivers have a general duty to operate their vehicles with reasonable care under existing conditions. You must still take reasonable evasive action to avoid a collision if you have sufficient time to act. Pena v Santana, 5 AD3d 649, 774 NYS2d 744 (2d Dept 2004).

If the other driver pulls out directly in front of you an instant before the collision, you cannot be held liable because there was no time to react. Driscoll v Casey, 299 AD2d 885, 750 NYS2d 223 (4th Dept 2002). However, if evidence shows you saw the vehicle entering the intersection from a distance, and did nothing to slow down or steer away, a jury may assign a percentage of “comparative fault” to you.

The Law Favors Driver with the Right of Way

So in your case, you should file a lawsuit against the other driver for your personal injuries. Although there is a chance that you could be blamed in part for the accident, you will prevail. This is because the other driver had a duty to follow the rules of the road.

By James Santner, Esq.

If you have questions about a similar situation, feel free to contact us. Consultations are free and there is no fee unless we win.