Was it really an ‘accident’? Let’s use the right word — it matters more than you think

Airplanes don’t “have accidents” — they crash. Trains don’t “have accidents” — they wreck.

So why do we call motor vehicle collisions “accidents”?

The words we use matter, especially at trial, because they can influence how a jury will interpret the facts. If we call a collision an “accident,” we subtly suggest that no one was at fault. Because of this, a growing number of Virginia courts and agencies, including the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, are moving away from “accident” in favor of more accurate terms like “collision.”

The Virginia DMV’s official forms now use words like “crash” instead of “accident.” For example:

• DMV Form FR300P: “Police Crash Report”
• DMV Form FR200: “Voluntary Report of a Crash”
• DMV Form CRD 93: “Information Request” for, inter alia, “Police Crash Report”

Virginia’s circuit courts are also starting to get it right.

On Nov. 20, 2023, in Chesterfield Circuit Court Case No. CL20-3168, the court recognized that the use of the word “accident” in a motor vehicle collision trial can be inaccurate, confusing, and/or misleading and, as such, entered an order stating “that the Court will substitute the word ‘accident’ with ‘collision’ when instructing the jury.’”

On Jan. 23, 2024, in Richmond Circuit Court Case No. CL23-3309, the court with the consent of all parties entered an order stating “that the Court will substitute the word ‘accident’ with ‘collision’ when instructing the jury.’”

These decisions reflect the understanding that the word “accident” can be misleading, and that “collision” presents a neutral description that allows jurors to consider negligence more objectively.

Why ‘accident’ is the wrong term

The word “accident” is generally defined as “an event or condition occurring by chance or arising from unknown or remote causes.” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 11 (1971); see also Black’s Law Dictionary 15 (6th ed. 1990) (“an event happening without any human agency”).)

By this logic, an “accident” implies that no one is to blame, which can mislead juries in cases where negligence is at issue.

Insisting on the use of the right language is not just a semantic choice — it’s a step towards achieving more just outcomes at trial.

Other prominent legal dictionaries also define the word “accident” to expressly exclude negligence. (See The Law Dictionary (2002) (“an unforeseen event, misfortune, act, or omission as is not the result of negligence or misconduct in any party”); Ballentine’s Law Dictionary (3d ed.) (“an occurrence which could not have been foreseen by the exercise of reasonable prudence”).)

Beyond just dictionary definitions, the Virginia Supreme Court has repeatedly explained, over the course of decades, that the word “accident” connotes an event that occurs without negligence. (See AES Corp. v. Steadfast Ins. Co., 283 Va. 609, 622 (2012) (Mims, J., concurring) (“[U]nder the reasoning of our precedents, allegations of negligence and allegations of accident must be mutually exclusive.”); Tri-State Coach Corp. v. Stidham, 191 Va. 790, 799 (1951) (noting that “in its strictly proper use the word [accident] excludes negligence”) (citing Black’s Law Dictionary 23 (3d ed.); Webster’s New International Dictionary 14 (2d ed., unabridged)); Byrne v. Edmonds, 64 Va. (23 Gratt.) 200, 210 (1873) (“By the term accident is included not merely inevitable casualty or the act of Providence . . . but such unforeseen events, misfortunes, losses, acts or omissions as are not the result of any negligence or misconduct in the party.”); see also Monterey Corp. v. Hart, 216 Va. 843, 850 (1976) (“A collision occurs between vehicles, and it is referred to as an ‘accident.’ [But n]ormally, negligence on the part of one or both parties is involved.”); Morris v. Travelers Indem. Co., 31 Va. Cir. 306, 311 (Greene County 1993) (“Generally, an ‘accident’ means a circumstance or event that is unusual and unexpected or fortuitous and unforeseen and occurs without fault.”).)

These longstanding definitions illustrate that the word “accident” is at odds with the reality of most motor vehicle personal injury trials because “collisions” often do not occur without negligence (e.g., reckless driving, distracted driving, or failure to obey traffic laws).

What trial lawyers should do

Admittedly, Virginia’s Civil Model Jury Instructions use the word “accident” in multiple instructions. However, the model instructions can and should be specifically tailored to the particular circumstances of this case by simply replacing the word “accident” with “crash.” (See Va. Model Jury Instructions-Civil(2) (“[M]any [instructions] will require some changes to make them fit the facts of a particular case …. The instructions provided in this volume are models or patterns from which to construct instructions that are apt for a case. Therefore, an instruction can be modified … to fit the particular facts and circumstances.”).)

Courts can and should substitute the word “accident” with “collision” when instructing the jury. And trial lawyers should insist that they do.

Motor vehicle collisions are not inevitable. They are largely preventable. When we label them as “accidents,” we imply a lack of control or responsibility, which undermines efforts to address the real issues. Insisting on the use of the right language is not just a semantic choice — it’s a step towards achieving more just outcomes at trial.

The words we use matter.

Sharif Gray is a trial lawyer at Broughton Injury Law and a co-host of the RVA Trial Lawyers podcast. He tried cases as a U.S. Army JAG Officer and as a drug and vice prosecutor, served as a federal judicial law clerk, and now takes cases to trial as a personal injury lawyer. He can be reached at 804-613-3800 or at [email protected].