The Las Vegas Strip Attacks, Automobile Insurance, and Tort Law

Automobile injuries are pervasive in tort law–over half of tort claims and three-quarters of all payouts.  They are not seen as interesting, however, and are rarely discussed.  A story out of Las Vegas is receiving uncharacteristic attention.  A 24-year-old woman, with a 3-year-old in her car, allegedly ran down 38 pedestrians on the Las Vegas Strip.  One person has died and 37 others have been injured.  Authorities have concluded she acted intentionally. 

From the perspective of compensating the victims, these facts reveal a lot about gaps in the system.  First, it appears the driver was a recent arrival in Nevada.  She was, therefore, subject to Nevada’s financial responsibility, and not compulsory automobile insurance, law.  In theory, that means she would only have to provide proof of security after causing an accident of $750 or more.  Because only New Hampshire operates solely with a financial responsibility law, the driver was likely coming from a state that required some amount of automobile insurance.  Of course, she could have been one of the millions of drivers who operate without insurance regardless of the requirement.  Moreover, even if she had been a lawful Nevada resident and purchased insurance pursuant to the compulsory automobile insurance law, the limits are $15,000 per person, $30,000 per occurrence, and $10,000 for property damage.  In other words, she may have had as little as $30,000 to compensate for 1 death and 37 injuries, many of them serious.  

Additionally, because the driver is alleged to have acted intentionally, the intentional acts exclusion, designed to counter moral hazard, will mean there is no liability insurance money available to the victims.  Some jurisdictions have ruled the intentional acts exclusion is invalid in the context of a compulsory automobile insurance law, but most have not.  Nevada appears to uphold the validity of the exclusion.  Thus, the tort cause of action available to victims would be battery and they would not likely be compensated through liability insurance.  The odds that the driver has enough assets to compensate for her wrongs are astronomically long.