The appropriate course is to sue the other driver directly and ignore the insurance company. A person cannot ignore a court summons, not even in Texas.
The judge will know that the other driver's insurance will ultimately pay, so he can punish the insurance company for its intransigence by putting a heavy financial penalty onto the other driver.
> The appropriate course is to sue the other driver directly and ignore the insurance company.
Yes, that's how you formally sue in an accident. It's not the hack you think it is, though, the insurance company defends the lawsuit, that's part of the insurance agreement.
It's also specifically what OP was unwilling to do which resulted in the insurance company not paying, and why any “the judge should...” is missing the point. If there was even the slightest expectation there would be a judge, the insurance company would have likely paid without batting an eye.
> Lawyers can’t represent clients in some small claims courts.
Which, given that the OP resides in California and was unwilling to pursue legal action in Texas because of inconvenience, isn't really helpful.
> And often just filing is enough for them to do the math and just pay out.
Yes, even just hinting at willingness to file a claim probably would have gotten the insurance company to settle in this case. That’s been the whole argument from the beginning.
> If there was even the slightest expectation there would be a judge,
Okay, I'm confused. My anecdote, which comes from Australia, indicates a 100% expectation of a judge. Are you saying that in Texas, a $US6K matter is likely to be considered too vexatious/trivial to receive a trial?
Or is it actually possible to decline a lawsuit in the USA?
This is an "explain it to me like I'm five years old" moment. I really don't know what you guys are talking about.
>Okay, I'm confused. My anecdote, which comes from Australia, indicates a 100% expectation of a judge. Are you saying that in Texas, a $US6K matter is likely to be considered too vexatious/trivial to receive a trial?
His point is that the OP (ie. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29719047) is refusing to sue, so there's no case to bring before a court. Everything else is irrelevant. Even if you'll obviously win, but you don't sue, it's not the state's job to file lawsuits for you.
> The appropriate course is to sue the other driver directly and ignore the insurance company. A person cannot ignore a court summons, not even in Texas.
As I read it, the teller of this story was unwilling to go to court, not even small-claims. If the justice system is not brought into the picture you can't seriously expect anyone to take claims of "you owe me money" seriously.
What judge?
The whole scenario is around a party who was not willing to go to court. There's no judge involved.