I'm not saying that this opinion is wrong. Indeed, it probably seems right to me. At least pursuant to existing law.
But if it's right -- and, again, I think it is -- this seems a fairly easy way around Proposition 213. One that, in this case alone, is worth $22 million. Plus additional millions for other unlicensed drivers as well.
It doesn't matter if the driver doesn't even have a license. Just have someone buy the car for him/her -- like the father did here -- and keep it in his name. Boom. You're effectively insured as a "permissive" driver of the vehicle. So when you're hit, the fact that you don't have insurance -- indeed, are not even permitted to buy insurance (since you don't have a license) -- is irrelevant. Your damages aren't capped under Proposition 213. Collect everything to which you'd normally be entitled.
P.S. - Want to see lawyers who hate each other? Who amply reveal that fact to the jury, as well as make repeated personal attacks on each other during closing argument? Check out the last dozen pages of the opinion. Wow. I can't believe the trial court permitted things to get this out of control.
