Ask someone to name a few things they associate with Manhattan and you’ll likely get a variety of answers : tall buildings, traffic jams, beeping horns, and undoubtedly, double parking. But after a recent court ruling, New Yorkers might think twice before double parking their vehicle to pick up passengers or make a quick stop at a convenience store.

In a January 2008 ruling by the First Department of the New York Supreme Court, the judge decided that a double parked van that had been hit in the rear while its passenger was boarding in March of 2004 was liable for that passenger’s injuries, even though the driver of the car that hit the van admitted to falling asleep at the wheel. The logic behind the ruling, which formed the case of White vs. Diaz, is that double parking impedes the flow of traffic and a driver should logically assume that he is creating a potential hazard for inattentive or distracted drivers by double parking. The judge reasoned that it was likely that if the driver of the van had been properly parked, the passenger would not have been injured.

The ruling in this case opens up a legal Pandora’s Box, because it brings into light the issue of proximate cause in liability cases. Proximate cause is defined as the event that is considered to be the cause of an injury.  Typically, in rear-end accidents, the inattention or negligence of the driver that hits the vehicle in the rear is considered the proximate cause of the injury. While proximate cause is usually decided by a jury when the answer is not clear, if we follow the logic of the ruling in the White vs. Diaz case, liability in any rear end collision involving a double parked car could be placed on the driver of the vehicle that gets hit.

So New Yorkers, beware. While double parking may be synonymous with the hustle and bustle of Manhattan, think twice before you give in to the temptation. If you are hit, it could end up costing you a lot more than a parking ticket.