November 22, 2024
Archive

Stonington family seeking damages from driver involved in ’99 fatal crash

ELLSWORTH – A Stonington family is seeking damages from the driver of a vehicle involved in a fatal accident five years ago in which their then-teenage daughter also was injured.

Lacy Greenlaw and her parents, Harold and Deborah Greenlaw, filed the suit in Hancock County Superior Court earlier this month against Matthew Bye of Stonington and his parents Charles and Alice Bye of Deer Isle.

The suit claims that Matthew Bye, who was 16 at the time of the accident, was the driver of the car traveling on the Airport Road in Stonington on the night of Dec. 23, 1999.

Due to Bye’s negligence, the suit states, he failed to negotiate a curve in the road and lost control of the vehicle, which left the road, struck some trees and flipped over.

Bye’s negligence, the suit claims, included excessive speed, failure to account for road conditions and driver inattention.

One teenage girl died in the accident and three others, including Lacy Greenlaw, who was then 14, were injured. Greenlaw suffered a laceration to the face, a head injury that resulted in short term memory loss, ongoing physical and mental pain, along with the associated medical bills, according to court documents.

Because Bye was 16 at the time of the accident and was driving his parents’ car, the suit claims they are both liable for damages resulting from their son’s actions.

The suit seeks an unspecified amount in damages.

The accident occurred just over five years ago, but Lacy Greenlaw’s ongoing medical problems and efforts to resolve the matter privately have kept the matter out of court until this time, according to Ellsworth attorney Catherine Haynes, who represents the Greenlaws.

A response filed last week by Bangor attorney Stephen Burlock, who represents the Byes, denied the claims that Matthew Bye had been negligent and that his negligence resulted in Lacy Greenlaw’s injuries.

That response also asserts that claims cannot be made against his clients because there was a presumption of risk on the part of the plaintiff.

In addition, the Byes’ response states that it was the acts or omissions of others that caused the damages, and therefore, the Byes are not responsible.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like