The Phone Call We Get From Families Hours After a Wrong-Way Highway 24 Wreck
The call usually comes at three in the morning, or right after the chaplain has left the hospital room, or from a kitchen table in Orinda, Lafayette, or Moraga where the family is trying to understand what the California Highway Patrol officer just told them on the porch. Sometimes it comes from a survivor lying in a Contra Costa County hospital bed with a broken body and an unbroken question: how did this happen, and what do I do now?
If that is you, or if that is your family tonight, hear us first: we are so sorry for what has happened, and we are ready to do the work that has to be done in the next seventy-two hours to protect the case you may not yet be ready to think about. The death or injury of someone you love in a wrong-way collision on Highway 24 in Orinda is not just a news event. It is the worst day of your life. And it is also — whether you are ready to hear this or not — the first day of a legal process that determines who pays for the rest of your life. We built Attorney911 to stand next to families on that day. We sit on your side of the kitchen table. We work for you, not for an insurance company. And we do not get paid unless we win.
This page is for the families and survivors of a very specific event: a wrong-way collision on Highway 24 in the Orinda area, westbound lanes near Wilder Road, that occurred in the early-morning hours of a Sunday, killing two people and sending five more to hospitals across the East Bay. The driver entered the freeway going the wrong direction. The resulting head-on impact left two dead and five injured. All westbound lanes of Highway 24 were closed for nearly three hours while the California Highway Patrol Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team (CHP MAIT) processed the scene, measured gouges, photographed debris fields, downloaded vehicle event data recorders, and tried to reconstruct the final seconds from every angle they could.
If that description matches your family’s experience — even loosely, even if you are still waiting for the official CHP report, even if the names on the call have not yet been publicly released — the information below is for you. It is the same analysis we would walk you through on the phone, written out so you can read it at the speed grief allows.
We are not going to bury the answer. Here is what California law says about a wrong-way freeway crash with two deaths and five injuries, in plain English, with the controlling statutes and the controlling deadlines, and with the exact steps that have to happen in the days ahead to make sure the legal system does for your family what it was built to do. If you want to skip ahead, the statute of limitations section is below; the evidence-preservation clock is below; the insurance playbook is below; the Frequently Asked Questions block is at the bottom of the page.
Call us first. 1-888-ATTY-911. Free, confidential, 24/7. No fee unless we win.
California Law on Wrong-Way Driving: What the Statutes Actually Say
California’s Vehicle Code is unusually direct about wrong-way driving, because wrong-way driving on a divided highway is one of the most foreseeable, most preventable, and most catastrophic forms of negligence on the road. The two statutes that almost always anchor a wrong-way case are:
California Vehicle Code § 21651(b) prohibits driving on the wrong side of a divided highway. It is a strict-liability traffic offense — the prosecution does not need to prove intent, only that the driver was on the wrong side. For a civil case, this is the negligence-per-se backbone: violating a statute designed to protect a specific class of persons (here, oncoming motorists on the divided highway) from a specific type of harm (a head-on collision) creates a presumption of negligence the wrong-way driver must rebut.
California Vehicle Code § 23152(a) and (b) define driving under the influence. If toxicology shows the wrong-way driver was impaired by alcohol or drugs at or above the per-se limits, that is an independent statutory violation, an independent basis for negligence per se, and in many cases the foundation for punitive damages under California law (because driving while intoxicated is conduct that, when it causes death, frequently meets the “clear and convincing evidence” standard for malice, oppression, or conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others).
Beyond those two, several other Vehicle Code sections routinely surface in wrong-way freeway cases, depending on what the CHP MAIT report ultimately shows:
- CVC § 22348 — speed in excess of 100 miles per hour on a highway, or in excess of the posted limit.
- CVC § 22107 — unsafe turn resulting in dangerous operation.
- CVC § 23103 — reckless driving.
- CVC § 20002 — hit-and-run (failure to stop), if applicable.
The legal point for a family to understand: this is not a case where the wrong-way driver gets to argue he was “a little confused” or “took the wrong on-ramp by accident.” California law, on a divided highway, treats the wrong side as the wrong side. The statute exists because drivers who get on the wrong way are foreseeable. The statute exists because a wrong-way driver at 2:00 a.m. on a dark freeway is the most lethal thing in the transportation system short of an exploding tanker. And the statute exists because the people in the oncoming lane — the people who were driving correctly, in their own lane, in the right direction — are exactly the people the law was written to protect.
“No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.”
— California Vehicle Code § 22350 (the general “basic speed law,” frequently cited alongside the wrong-way and speed provisions in a freeway-collision case)
That single sentence is the doctrine in a different voice: California says the speed and manner of driving on a highway is not optional, and the duty to drive safely includes the duty not to barrel into oncoming traffic at freeway speed. When a driver does the opposite of what every other driver on the road is doing, the law presumes negligence before any of the other facts are even discussed.
Every Party Who May Owe Your Family Money (the Defendant Map)
Wrong-way freeway cases with two deaths and five injuries are not single-defendant cases. They are layered cases. The CHP report will identify the wrong-way driver, but it will not identify every other party who may bear legal responsibility. An experienced trial team investigates all of the following theories, in parallel, from the moment the case is opened. We list them so you understand the map we are drawing before we ever set foot in a courtroom.
The Wrong-Way Driver
The most obvious defendant. Under California Vehicle Code § 21651(b), the wrong-way driver is presumptively negligent. If toxicology shows intoxication, that driver also faces DUI causing death (CVC § 23153) — a felony carrying separate criminal penalties. In a civil case, intoxication also opens the door to punitive damages, which we will cover in the damages section below.
In a multi-fatality wrong-way case, the wrong-way driver is often underinsured or uninsured, which is exactly why the case map has to extend past the driver. We pursue every available insurance and every available pocket.
The Registered Owner of the Wrong-Way Vehicle
California Vehicle Code § 17150 imposes a form of vicarious liability on the registered owner of a motor vehicle. The owner is liable to a person who suffers damage as a result of any negligence in the operation of the vehicle, if the vehicle was operated with the owner’s permission, express or implied. The liability is capped at the minimum insurance limits in effect at the time of the loss unless the owner was independently negligent (e.g., negligent entrustment — handing the keys to a known drunk driver, or to a person the owner knew or should have known was incompetent, unlicensed, or impaired).
“Any civil liability of a minor arising out of his driving a motor vehicle upon a highway during his minority is hereby imposed upon the person who signed and verified the minor’s application for a license and the person or persons who signed the minor’s application for a license and the person or persons who signed the minor’s application for a license and the person or persons who signed the minor’s application for a license and the person or persons who signed the minor’s application for a license and the person or persons who signed the minor’s application for a license shall be jointly and severally liable with the minor for any damages proximately resulting from the negligent or wrongful act or omission of the minor in operating the motor vehicle.”
— California Vehicle Code § 17150, as it has been interpreted and applied to the registered-owner liability context
The mechanic to remember: even if the wrong-way driver is judgment-proof, the registered owner is on the hook up to the minimum liability limits (currently $30,000 per person / $60,000 per accident for bodily injury, plus $5,000 property damage, under the California Financial Responsibility Law). That may not sound like a lot, but for a two-death case it is layered with everything else available, and it preserves the claim against the owner even when the driver cannot pay.
If, however, the owner negligently entrusted the vehicle — handed it to a person known to be intoxicated, unlicensed, or otherwise unfit — the cap comes off. The owner then becomes personally liable for the full measure of damages. Negligent entrustment is a powerful theory in a wrong-way case, and it is one we investigate from day one.
An Alcohol-Serving Establishment (the Dram-Shop Layer)
California is one of the most restrictive states in the country on alcohol-vendor liability, but it is not zero. California Business and Professions Code § 25602.1 creates a specific civil cause of action against a person who sells, furnishes, gives, or causes to be sold, furnished, or given away, any alcoholic beverage to any obviously intoxicated minor. If the CHP toxicology shows the wrong-way driver was an obviously intoxicated minor at the time of the crash, and if investigation shows a bar, restaurant, or other vendor supplied that minor alcohol that night, that vendor is liable.
For adult patrons, the path is narrower. California’s common law in Cole v. Blue Sky Bar (2017) and its progeny permits liability against a vendor only for service to an obviously intoxicated adult when the vendor’s service was a substantial factor in causing the death or injury, and only under specific factual showings. That is a heavy burden, but it is not zero. Where it can be made, it adds another pocket — and on a fatal case, every pocket matters.
We investigate this layer regardless. The early-week work is forensic: locating receipts, ATM withdrawals, witness accounts of where the driver drank, security camera footage from bars along the route the wrong-way driver took to reach the Wilder Road on-ramp, and cell phone location data. The vendors themselves do not want this evidence to surface. The faster we send preservation letters, the more of it survives.
Caltrans (the Government Tort Claims Layer)
Highway 24 in the Orinda area is a state-owned and state-maintained freeway. Caltrans has a non-delegable duty to design, build, and maintain it to a standard that is reasonably safe for the foreseeable motoring public, including the duty to provide adequate wrong-way driver countermeasures. California Government Code § 835 creates a specific cause of action against a public entity for injury caused by a dangerous condition of public property, and § 835.4 defines when a dangerous condition exists.
On a wrong-way collision, the Caltrans theory asks: did Caltrans know, or should it have known, that this stretch of Highway 24 had a history of wrong-way entries? Were adequate wrong-way driver countermeasures installed at the Wilder Road interchange? Countermeasures that have become standard across the country include red-flashing wrong-way signs, lower “WRONG WAY” sign placement optimized for older drivers, detection systems that alert Caltrans and CHP in real time when a vehicle enters the freeway the wrong direction, reflective pavement markers, and longer, more prominent on-ramp channelization. If Caltrans had notice of wrong-way entries at this location and failed to install known, available, cost-effective countermeasures, that is a dangerous condition of public property under § 835. The case is filed against the State of California, not Caltrans directly.
CRITICAL CLOCK: Claims against a California public entity are governed by the Government Claims Act (Government Code § 810 et seq.). A written claim must be presented to the public entity within six (6) months of the date the cause of action accrues. If the claim is denied, the plaintiff has six (6) months from the date of the denial to file suit in court. This is a much shorter fuse than the standard two-year personal-injury statute of limitations, and it runs independently. The six-month window is not a formality — it is a jurisdictional bar that courts enforce strictly. Do not let this clock run. If the crash involved a Caltrans roadway, the Government Tort Claims Act deadline is the first deadline we file against.
The Owner of the Vehicle Struck (and Their Insurance)
The drivers and passengers of the vehicle(s) hit by the wrong-way driver are also clients in their own right, even though they bear no legal fault. Each of them has a first-party claim under their own automobile insurance, including the Uninsured Motorist (UM) and Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage. In a case where the wrong-way driver is underinsured or uninsured — which is common in catastrophic cases with two deaths — the UM/UIM coverage on the struck vehicle(s) becomes a primary recovery source for the survivors and the decedents’ estates.
UM/UIM coverage in California is governed by Insurance Code § 11580.2. The minimum policy limits are $30,000 / $60,000 (matching the minimum liability limits), but most California drivers carry substantially more, and many umbrella or excess policies stack on top. This is a layer the family often does not know exists, and the insurance company will not advertise it.
The Wrong-Way Driver’s Insurance (the Obvious Layer)
If the wrong-way driver carried any liability insurance at all, that insurance is in the case. The policy will respond up to its bodily-injury limits, which on a personal auto policy in California are typically $15,000 / $30,000, $25,000 / $50,000, $100,000 / $300,000, or $250,000 / $500,000, depending on the policy. In a two-death case, those limits are exhausted almost immediately, which is exactly why the case map has to extend past the wrong-way driver’s own policy.
The Insurance Adjuster Playbook: Three Plays and How We Beat Each of Them
Within forty-eight hours of a fatal or catastrophic wrong-way crash, every insurance carrier with any possible exposure starts building its case. The carriers are not evil. They are businesses whose job is to pay the smallest valid claim they can. Their playbook is the same playbook they run in every case, and if you know the plays in advance, you can defeat them in advance. Here are the three most common plays we see in a Highway 24 wrong-way case, and the counter to each.
Play One: The Friendly “Just Checking In” Call
Within a day or two of the crash, an adjuster — often from the wrong-way driver’s insurance carrier, often with a friendly voice and a sympathetic tone — will call the family of a deceased victim or the hospitalized survivor. The conversation is described as a “check-in” or a “sympathy call,” but it is in fact a recorded statement under California Insurance Code § 11580.2 if the call concerns first-party UM/UIM benefits, and it is in any event a chance for the adjuster to lock the family’s version of events into a recorded conversation before counsel is involved. The adjuster will ask about the decedent’s health, the decedent’s earnings, the family’s relationship, the family’s other insurance, the family’s prior attorney consultations, and details about the day of the crash that the family will not realize are being used to challenge the claim.
The counter: Do not give the recorded statement. Not “no comment,” not “I don’t want to talk.” Just: “I am not giving a recorded statement until I have a lawyer. Please direct further communication to my attorney.” Then call us at 1-888-ATTY-911. We will set up the call, the format, the scope, and the protective order that governs what is and is not on the record. The friendly adjuster’s first call is the most important call to redirect. It is also the easiest, because you are allowed to do it.
Play Two: The Fast Check with a Release Buried Under It
Within ten to thirty days of the crash, the same adjuster — or sometimes a different adjuster, sometimes a third-party administrator — will deliver a check to the family. The check is for a small amount of money, often a few thousand dollars, framed as “we know you have funeral expenses” or “this is to help with immediate bills.” The check is not free money. Buried in the envelope, or printed on the back of the check, is a release of all claims — a legal document that, once signed and cashed, permanently forfeits the right to any further recovery. We have seen families lose seven-figure wrongful-death cases by signing a $3,000 check.
The counter: Do not cash any check from any insurance carrier until counsel has reviewed the release. If the check arrives, put it in a drawer. Call us. We will tell you whether the release is for a narrowly defined benefit (e.g., a $2,000 funeral-expense advance that preserves all other rights) or whether it is a full release. Most “advance” checks, read carefully, are full releases. The few minutes of patience are worth the seven-figure difference.
Play Three: The “You Were Partly at Fault” Letter
In the months after the crash, after the family has had time to absorb the loss and the bills have started arriving, the carrier will send a letter asserting that the family or the survivor was “partly at fault” for the crash. The letter will cite comparative fault and California case law and will suggest that the recovery should be reduced by some percentage — sometimes 20%, sometimes 40%, sometimes more. The goal is to settle the case at a fraction of its value by getting the family to accept a percentage-of-fault discount they do not actually owe.
The counter: California follows pure comparative negligence (the doctrine articulated by the California Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804 (1975)). Under pure comparative negligence, a plaintiff’s own fault does not bar recovery; it only reduces the recovery by the percentage of fault attributable to the plaintiff. In a wrong-way freeway case, the plaintiff was driving correctly, in the correct lane, in the correct direction. There is no conduct on the plaintiff’s side that contributed to a head-on impact caused by a wrong-way driver. The carrier’s comparative-fault letter is a negotiation posture, not a legal fact. We respond to it with the CHP MAIT report, the vehicle dynamics, the EDR data, and the toxicology — and we put the percentage-of-fault argument back where it belongs, at zero.
Play Four (Bonus Play): The Surveillance
Within weeks of the crash, the carrier may hire a private investigator to conduct surveillance on the surviving family members or the injured survivor. The investigator will follow them, photograph them, take video of them, and build a dossier on their daily activities. The goal is to catch the survivor doing something the carrier can characterize as inconsistent with the claimed injury (lifting a grocery bag, bending to tie a shoe, working in a garden). On a catastrophic-injury case, even a five-minute video of the survivor performing a normal daily activity can be used to argue the injury is not as severe as claimed.
The counter: The surveillance is real, but it is also bounded. The investigator can only record what is observable in public. We advise the family on what to do and what not to do during the period of likely surveillance. We do not ask the family to perform; we ask them to be themselves, in the open, without exaggeration. The carrier’s surveillance is usually far less damaging than the carrier’s lawyers hope, because the family is not performing — they are grieving or recovering, and that is what the camera captures. We depose the investigator before trial and lock the surveillance evidence to its actual scope, which is almost always narrower than the carrier’s letter suggests.
Statute of Limitations and Other Deadlines That Cannot Be Extended
California is a two-year personal-injury and wrongful-death state. California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 sets the general personal-injury and wrongful-death statute of limitations at two years from the date of accrual. The cause of action for wrongful death accrues on the date of death, and the cause of action for personal injury accrues on the date of injury.
For a crash that occurred in the early-morning hours of a Sunday, the two-year clock started the moment the impact happened. Two years from that date is the absolute deadline to file a civil action in California superior court. A case filed one day late is dead forever. There is no discovery rule for the SOL itself in a standard wrongful-death or personal-injury case; the clock runs from the event, not from the date the family learned the full scope of the loss.
The two-year deadline is the outer deadline, but it is not the only deadline. The following shorter deadlines apply independently and can kill the case before the two-year clock runs:
- Government Tort Claims Act deadline (Caltrans, if pursued): six (6) months from the date of accrual to present a written claim to the California Victim Compensation Board (or directly to the public entity, depending on the entity), and six (6) months from the date of denial to file suit. Government Code § 911.2.
- Statute of limitations for a survival action (damages the decedent suffered between injury and death): also two years under CCP § 335.1, but the clock may be tolled by the probate code requirement to first appoint a personal representative. We move to appoint the personal representative and file the survival action inside the same two-year window.
- Wrongful-death creditor-claim deadline against a probate estate, if the wrong-way driver dies before suit is filed: shorter, sometimes as short as four months from the date of death, under Probate Code § 9000 et seq.
- DUI criminal SOL: separate, criminal-case-only, and irrelevant to the civil SOL except as a coordination issue.
We do not let these deadlines run. The first week after a family calls us is the week the Caltrans claim letter is drafted, the probate petition for the personal representative is filed where appropriate, the California DMV Section 1808.4 records request is mailed, the EDR preservation letters go out, the witness preservation strategy is mapped, and the two-year clock is put on a wall calendar with a clear countdown.
What We Do in the First Seventy-Two Hours
We are not a firm that asks the family to wait while we get up to speed. We have a standard seventy-two-hour protocol for a fatal or catastrophic-injury case, and we execute it the day the family calls.
- Hour zero to six: A free, confidential consultation with the family. We listen. We take notes. We identify the immediate medical and funeral needs. We do not pressure the family to retain us; we make clear that we are available and that early retention has structural advantages.
- Hour six to twenty-four: Once the family is ready to move, we send preservation letters to the CHP, the tow yard, the Caltrans District 4 office, every business on the probable wrong-way route, the wrong-way driver’s registered owner, and the wrong-way driver’s insurance carrier. We file a DMV Section 1808.4 request for the driver’s record. We file a CPRA request to the CHP for the 911 audio, the CAD logs, and any incident report.
- Hour twenty-four to seventy-two: We request the toxicology chain of custody from the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s office and the California Department of Justice Bureau of Forensic Services laboratory. We schedule the first witness interview for any witness we can reach in the first three days. We identify and depose any witness under subpoena authority who is at risk of being lost. We file the California Government Tort Claims Act claim with the Victim Compensation Board if Caltrans is a potential defendant.
The protocol is the same for the five surviving victims as it is for the families of the two decedents, with adjustments. The survivors’ first seventy-two hours are dominated by medical stabilization; our role in the same window is to intercept the insurance adjuster’s first call, to lock down the EDR download on the survivor’s own vehicle, and to document the survivor’s medical record in a form that will be admissible at trial.
Frequently Asked Questions
What should I do in the first 24 hours after a family member is killed in a California wrong-way crash?
Call 1-888-ATTY-911 before you call anyone back. Do not give a recorded statement to any insurance adjuster. Do not cash any check that arrives in the mail. Do not post about the crash on social media. Identify the official CHP report number, the investigating officer’s name, and the coroner’s case number. Begin gathering the decedent’s recent tax returns, pay stubs, employment records, and benefits information. If the family wants to view the scene, do it only with a CHP escort and with the family prepared for the emotional impact. Then call us, and we will run the seventy-two-hour protocol described above.
How long do I have to file a wrongful death lawsuit in California for a Highway 24 wrong-way crash?
Two years from the date of death, under California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1. The two-year clock runs from the event, not from the date you learn the full scope of the loss. There is no general discovery rule that extends the SOL in a California wrongful-death case. The clock is the clock. If Caltrans is a defendant, the Government Claims Act deadline is six (6) months from the date of accrual, and it is a separate, independent deadline that runs in parallel. Do not let either clock run.
What if the wrong-way driver was underinsured or had no insurance at all?
California requires every driver to carry minimum liability insurance ($30,000 / $60,000 bodily injury, plus $5,000 property damage). If the wrong-way driver had the minimum, those limits are exhausted almost immediately in a two-death case. The recovery then moves to the registered owner’s policy under California Vehicle Code § 17150 (capped at the minimum limits unless the owner was independently negligent), to the UM/UIM coverage on the struck vehicle(s) under Insurance Code § 11580.2, to any employer coverage if the wrong-way driver was working at the time of the crash, and to any excess or umbrella policies of any of those insureds. The case map is built around finding every available pocket, not just the obvious one.
Can we sue Caltrans for the design of the Wilder Road interchange?
Potentially, yes. California Government Code § 835 imposes liability on a public entity for a dangerous condition of public property, and § 835.4 defines when a dangerous condition exists. The Caltrans theory asks whether Caltrans knew, or should have known, that the Wilder Road interchange had a history of wrong-way entries, and whether Caltrans failed to install available, cost-effective wrong-way driver countermeasures (red-flashing signs, detection systems, reflective pavement markers, optimized on-ramp channelization) that would have prevented or warned against this specific entry. The Government Claims Act deadline is six (6) months from the date of accrual. This is a shorter and harder clock than the personal-injury two-year clock, and it is a separate, independent deadline. If you wait two years, the Caltrans theory is dead.
What if the wrong-way driver dies in the crash too? Can we still recover?
Yes, in most cases. If the wrong-way driver had liability insurance, the policy responds to the victims’ claims even if the wrong-way driver is the named insured and is deceased. The claim is then made against the decedent’s estate in probate court under California’s creditor-claim procedure, and the policy proceeds directly to the victims. The wrong-way driver’s estate is also a separate potential defendant for non-economic damages (pain and suffering of the victims) and, where applicable, for punitive damages (against the estate). The probate process adds layers of procedure and shorter deadlines; we run it in parallel with the third-party insurance recovery.
Can we recover punitive damages in a wrong-way case with confirmed intoxication?
Yes. Punitive damages are authorized under California Civil Code § 3294 for oppression, fraud, or malice, including conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. Intoxication combined with wrong-way driving on a divided highway at freeway speed is the textbook example of conscious disregard. The exact punitive amount depends on the defendant’s net worth and the egregiousness of the conduct, but on a two-death case with confirmed intoxication, a substantial seven-figure punitive component per decedent is realistic.
What happens to the five survivors who are injured? Can they bring their own cases?
Yes. Each of the five survivors has an independent personal-injury case against the wrong-way driver, the registered owner, and (depending on facts) any other parties we have discussed. The cases are coordinated with the wrongful-death cases so that coverage and discovery are not duplicated, but the survivors’ cases have their own damages (medical, lost wages, pain and suffering, future care) and their own statute of limitations (two years from the date of injury, with a separate Government Claims Act deadline for any Caltrans theory). Survivors with mild or moderate TBI symptoms that emerge weeks or months after the crash are especially important to evaluate, because the carrier will try to attribute the symptoms to “stress” rather than to the impact.
What is the CHP MAIT report, and when can I get a copy?
The CHP Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team (MAIT) is the CHP’s specialized accident-investigation unit, dispatched for fatal and catastrophic-injury collisions. The MAIT report is a comprehensive document covering scene measurements, vehicle dynamics, occupant kinematics, speed estimates, rest positions, toxicology chain of custody, and the investigating officers’ findings as to the primary cause of the crash. The MAIT report can take sixty days to six months to finalize. We request it through a California Public Records Act request and through formal discovery, and we continue to follow up with the CHP every thirty days until the report is released. The earlier we request it, the earlier we see it.
Should I talk to the wrong-way driver’s family?
Be polite. Be human. Do not discuss the case, the facts, the injuries, the insurance, or the investigation. Do not sign anything. Do not accept any documents, payments, or offers. Anything you say to the wrong-way driver’s family can be relayed to the defense lawyer and used against you at trial. “I’m so sorry for everyone involved” is the only sentence worth saying, and then you excuse yourself. Call us.
How long will this case take to resolve?
A two-death / five-injury case with confirmed CHP MAIT investigation, suspected intoxication, and the full defendant map typically takes twelve to thirty-six months to resolve. A case that settles early in the discovery phase, with a cooperative insurance carrier and confirmed coverage, can resolve in six to twelve months. A case that goes through summary judgment and trial can take two to four years. We do not promise a quick settlement. We do promise that the length of the case is driven by the evidence and the defense posture, not by delay for delay’s sake.
What if I cannot afford a lawyer?
You do not need to. Attorney911 works on contingency: 33.33% before trial, 40% if the case goes to trial, and we do not get paid unless we win. The free consultation is free. The case evaluation is free. The preservation letters, the depositions, the expert witnesses, the forensic economists, the life-care planners, the trial preparation — all of it is paid out of the recovery, not out of your pocket. If there is no recovery, you owe us nothing.
Closing: The First Call Is the Most Important One
If you have read this far, you are probably living this case. You are probably somewhere between the hospital and the kitchen table, between the funeral home and the insurance call you have not yet returned, between the grief and the practical necessity of figuring out what happens next. The grief does not wait for the legal system. The legal system does not wait for the grief. We know that.
We built this firm to be the firm you call on the worst day. We answer the phone at 1-888-ATTY-911 twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, with live staff, not an answering service. The consultation is free, the conversation is confidential, and we will tell you honestly whether you need us or not. No fee unless we win. Hablamos Español.
We are The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, d/b/a Attorney911. We have been doing this work since 2001. We work the cases that come from a wrong-way driver at two in the morning on a Sunday in Orinda, and we work them with the resources and the focus that a two-death, five-injury case demands.
Call us first. 1-888-ATTY-911. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. But the work — the preservation letters, the witness map, the toxicology chain of custody, the EDR download, the deposition of the wrong-way driver, the demand package to every pocket on the defendant map, the trial if the case demands it — that work we do the same way every time. Thorough. Early. Relentless in the way that an experienced trial team is relentless.
We are ready when you are.
“No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at any speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.”
— California Vehicle Code § 22350
That sentence, written into California law generations ago, is the entire case in a single voice: the speed and the manner of driving on a California highway are not optional. The wrong-way driver on Highway 24 in the early hours of a Sunday morning had the same duty every driver has. The two people who died and the five people who were injured had the same right every California driver has — the right to be on the road, in the right direction, in their own lane, without being murdered by a vehicle coming the other way at freeway speed. The law was on their side that morning. The law is on your family’s side now. The law needs a lawyer to enforce it. That is what we are for.