The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: This was successfully done some years ago...

(See in situ)

This was successfully done some years ago...

In one of the northern states, this was done in reverse!

By that I mean, it was successfully argued in a court case resultant to a PI, personal injury case (auto accident), that since the state required the citizen to purchase auto insurance, and in addition the state fined those who did not produce proof of insurance when stopped by a police officer of that state... get this... the state therefore could be held as a party to the lawsuit stemming from the accident!

In other words, the state was found to be co-liable along with the insurance company, for damages. All because the state was the author of the requirement to buy insurance and punished the driver for failing to have the insurance the state required them to have.

In the case I read about some years ago, to escape liability the state was finding and reimbursing all the people who had been fined for failure to produce evidence of insurance coverage! It was anticipated at that time that the decisions of those state courts could be precedent setting in other states.

It will take some time to track that down, but I believe it was in Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Michigan, maybe during the Gov. Jesse era. I will post if I can find the material.