Question for lawyer types...
12-05-2001, 09:27 AM
#1
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for lawyer types...
Ok,
So I'm dropping my little girl off at school this morning. The street in front of the school is heavily congested with traffic. (2lanes)
In front of the school are a number of parking spots, with 2 of them being handicapped (and well spaced apart between the two). As I have a number of mornings (as well as seen other parents do) I pulled in to one of the stalls, let out my girl, and proceeded to start backing up (30 seconds) As I start to back up, I hear the horn of a motorcycle cop and the officer pulls up next to me to and asks to see my handicap placard.
I replied that I wasn't parked, and he said that pulling into the blue and stopping was "parked" and that it was a $330 fine. He then said take this as a "learning experience" and let me go. What I want to know is, what is parked? And what is to "leave standing?" I wouldn't think of taking up a spot from a physically disabled person, but to use the spot to avoid the traffic congestion and let my girl out for a max of 30 seconds doesn't seem like "parking" or "left standing" to me either, especially when the other spot is open, and I would move immediately out of a legitimate claim to the spot.
Below is the California Legal Code... anyone care to interpet for me?
22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle
whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a
peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the
following places: (IT then goes on to list a number of places... parking stalls included, but thought it might be helpful in explaining to the officer why I was using the spot temporarily)
22507.8. (a) It is unlawful for any person to park or leave
standing any vehicle in a stall or space designated for disabled
persons and disabled veterans pursuant to Section 22511.7 or 22511.8,
unless the vehicle displays either a special identification license
plate issued pursuant to Section 5007 or a distinguishing placard
issued pursuant to Section 22511.55 or 22511.59.
(b) It is unlawful for any person to obstruct, block, or otherwise
bar access to those parking stalls or spaces except as provided in
subdivision (a).
TIA
Ross
So I'm dropping my little girl off at school this morning. The street in front of the school is heavily congested with traffic. (2lanes)
In front of the school are a number of parking spots, with 2 of them being handicapped (and well spaced apart between the two). As I have a number of mornings (as well as seen other parents do) I pulled in to one of the stalls, let out my girl, and proceeded to start backing up (30 seconds) As I start to back up, I hear the horn of a motorcycle cop and the officer pulls up next to me to and asks to see my handicap placard.
I replied that I wasn't parked, and he said that pulling into the blue and stopping was "parked" and that it was a $330 fine. He then said take this as a "learning experience" and let me go. What I want to know is, what is parked? And what is to "leave standing?" I wouldn't think of taking up a spot from a physically disabled person, but to use the spot to avoid the traffic congestion and let my girl out for a max of 30 seconds doesn't seem like "parking" or "left standing" to me either, especially when the other spot is open, and I would move immediately out of a legitimate claim to the spot.
Below is the California Legal Code... anyone care to interpet for me?
22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle
whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a
peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the
following places: (IT then goes on to list a number of places... parking stalls included, but thought it might be helpful in explaining to the officer why I was using the spot temporarily)
22507.8. (a) It is unlawful for any person to park or leave
standing any vehicle in a stall or space designated for disabled
persons and disabled veterans pursuant to Section 22511.7 or 22511.8,
unless the vehicle displays either a special identification license
plate issued pursuant to Section 5007 or a distinguishing placard
issued pursuant to Section 22511.55 or 22511.59.
(b) It is unlawful for any person to obstruct, block, or otherwise
bar access to those parking stalls or spaces except as provided in
subdivision (a).
TIA
Ross
12-05-2001, 09:47 AM
#5
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: You're looking at the letter versus the spirit of the law ...
Interpreting "except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic" is mostly someones opinion - aparently, the officer either believed you wouldn't conflicting with other traffic by sitting in a lane of traffic or didn't know the fine print to the traffic code.
Given that safety is a higher concern than chance of getting a ticket ('specially with your kid involved), I would keep parking in the handicap spot. Even if you get a ticket, I imagine a quick court appearance would dismiss the ticket.
conflict with other traffic" is mostly someones opinion - aparently, the officer either believed you wouldn't conflicting with other traffic by sitting in a lane of traffic or didn't know the fine print to the traffic code.
Given that safety is a higher concern than chance of getting a ticket ('specially with your kid involved), I would keep parking in the handicap spot. Even if you get a ticket, I imagine a quick court appearance would dismiss the ticket.
12-05-2001, 10:09 AM
#6
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well.... my interpretation of the statute is... ............................ that officer is an ***!
It depends.
First let me qualify the following remarks in that I'm a corporate transactions attorney, so I have very little practice experience in these types of matters other than raw legal skills developed in law school and practice.
The first code section you cite (22500) is not dispositive and only provides suggestive/interpretive value with sections 22500.1 through 22507.0. Most of these sections have many references to the following actions "stop, park or leave standing."
Section 22507.8 does not reference the action "stop".
Because the legislature decided to leave out the word "stop" that may (I would argue should) mean that stopping does not mean parking.
But....
To "park" and "leave standing" could mean stopping. Leave standing does not necessarily mean leave standing unattended. Could "leave standing" but attended mean someone is occupying or inside the vehicle? Maybe. Could it mean the engine has to be off to leave standing but attended? Maybe.
I would argue that to "stop" does not mean to "park", because of the legislature's (suppposed) conscious decision to leave out 'stop' in 22507.8 and other sections, while including it in others.
But then again, if your stopped, you are preventing immediate access to the stall. Is that an action that implicates "obstruct" or "block" in the statute? Maybe.
Basically, it depends on who interprets the law and their application of the facts to the law. One judge could say you parked, another could say you just stopped, another could say you 'materially obstructed' the stall.
I think a reasonable judge would conclude that you did not park (engine on, dropping off child, short duration, traffic exigencies, ommission of stop from statute, etc...).
But regardless of what a judge would say, I don't think you violated the statute, and that officer is a ***** for doing that in front of your little girl! (and I don't care if he didn't write you a ticket, he's a *****!)
Any litigators out there that have a different take? If so, see the findlaw link attached.
MC<ul><li><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/veh/22500%2D22526.html">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/veh/22500%2D22526.html</a</li></ul>
First let me qualify the following remarks in that I'm a corporate transactions attorney, so I have very little practice experience in these types of matters other than raw legal skills developed in law school and practice.
The first code section you cite (22500) is not dispositive and only provides suggestive/interpretive value with sections 22500.1 through 22507.0. Most of these sections have many references to the following actions "stop, park or leave standing."
Section 22507.8 does not reference the action "stop".
Because the legislature decided to leave out the word "stop" that may (I would argue should) mean that stopping does not mean parking.
But....
To "park" and "leave standing" could mean stopping. Leave standing does not necessarily mean leave standing unattended. Could "leave standing" but attended mean someone is occupying or inside the vehicle? Maybe. Could it mean the engine has to be off to leave standing but attended? Maybe.
I would argue that to "stop" does not mean to "park", because of the legislature's (suppposed) conscious decision to leave out 'stop' in 22507.8 and other sections, while including it in others.
But then again, if your stopped, you are preventing immediate access to the stall. Is that an action that implicates "obstruct" or "block" in the statute? Maybe.
Basically, it depends on who interprets the law and their application of the facts to the law. One judge could say you parked, another could say you just stopped, another could say you 'materially obstructed' the stall.
I think a reasonable judge would conclude that you did not park (engine on, dropping off child, short duration, traffic exigencies, ommission of stop from statute, etc...).
But regardless of what a judge would say, I don't think you violated the statute, and that officer is a ***** for doing that in front of your little girl! (and I don't care if he didn't write you a ticket, he's a *****!)
Any litigators out there that have a different take? If so, see the findlaw link attached.
MC<ul><li><a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/veh/22500%2D22526.html">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/veh/22500%2D22526.html</a</li></ul>
