Lawyer wants photos of car wreck

I snapped some photos a car wreck a few weeks back, turns out guy was drunk and hit a few people and now of course is being sued.
Bystander that got hit lawyers some how got my info and wants photos for case, have not spoken with the lawyer yet just front desk.
So what to do?" Part of me says give the photos to the guy that got hit and help another person out. The other thing is that I am a professional and selling photos is how I put food on my table.
delimas, I have them. advice i dont!
what would you do?"
Joe

You will need to know the letter of the law before you can consider your options. Are your pictures of the accident as it is taking place, or just after shots? Can you be considered a witness? Could you be considered as withholding evidence if you do not give them the pictures? You should find out these thing first and then think about what you want to do. I would not give into pressure by the attorney, but I'm not sure the best way to find this information out without consulting another attorney.


Good luck.

You can charge for the pictures.

Advise them that a subpoena is required so that you are held harmless. Most legal cases involving making copies of documents etc allow for a charge of the documents being reprinted or copied. You would be able to document the amount of time taken to reproduce the items (hourly rate) and rate for reproduction of the copy (or picture).

I did this in banking for 20 years.

As long as you have a set fee, stick to it and send a bill along with the photograph when the subpoena is received. Don't send a bill for $1,000 if you only charge $50 or $75 per hour.

If the above questions are on your side, and the guy that got hit was not seriously injured I would say charge a few bucks for the images (say they went in your archive and it will take time/cost to get them out) maybe a couple hundred for them somethings better then nothing (the lawyer is making at least $100/hour). Now if the guys was hurt thats a different moral story.

Bufordfz1 and all that have quickly replied. Thank you so much and now I have more info to guide myself with.
The guy that was hurt as a bystander just got off a city bus and has been hit twice at that bus stop, you would think the city would move the stop. he had minor injurys.
Joe

Lots of legal issues today...

I am a lawyer. Let me say to start with, that each state's procedural rules vary, so I can't give a definite answer. Also, I have to give the disclaimer that by offering the following few general comments, I am not attempting to give you legal advice or otherwise establish an attorney-client relationship.

With that out of the way, in general, a third party (that is, someone who is not a party to the lawsuit) is not under any obligation to give any kind of documents, including photos, to a party in a lawsuit or their attorneys. Nor are you required to talk to the parties or their attorneys, even if you are a witness...

...BUT, that changes if the lawyer asks the court for a subpoena. A subpoena is an order from the court requiring you to provide copies of the documents or photos to the parties, or to appear at a deposition (where you would give sworn testimony in response to questions). If you receive a subpoena, you are required to give the parties the documents, or else you can be held in contempt of court and fined or even imprisoned.

Now, the party seeking the subpoena has to pay you your expenses that you will incur in complying with the subpoena. Ordinarily, that means paying your gas money and mileage to appear at a deposition, or paying the copying costs for providing the documents they requested. For pics, that would mean strictly the cost of getting copies made of the photos. It would NOT be some amount along the lines of a royalty you would charge someone ordinarily to buy the rights to your photo.

My guess is, this is how this situation will play out. If you offer to sell the photos to the lawyer, s/he will likely refuse, because (a) they can subpoena them later anyway, and (b) another lawyer may be able to put doubt in a jury's mind about the veracity of evidence that the lawyer purchased. S/he will then get a subpoena from the court, and you will be required to provide the photos, and you will get the costs of producing the copies, but nothing else.

I could be wrong, but that is how I would anticipate things to go, unless the lawyer just decides that the pics aren't necessary.

Plawren53202
I thought this one through from past dealings with our family lawyer and how the thing may play out. I doubt that the images I have would help this person get more out of any suit, the info is already in the statements from bystanders and I doubt that they would need much more then that. My photos are mere eye candy if it went to jury I would guess.
I worked as an EMT for years before doing this gig, so I was able to anticipate the good shots and the one I have of the little girl getting carried on the ped spine board, mother crying and being consoled by a firman is pure eye candy and would sway the strongest of hearts to think out of emotion and not out of rational thought.
But the lawyer calling upon me for photos does not have the little girl as a client so it may not help thier case.
Joe

riggerjoe wrote in post #14769073
Plawren53202
I thought this one through from past dealings with our family lawyer and how the thing may play out. I doubt that the images I have would help this person get more out of any suit, the info is already in the statements from bystanders and I doubt that they would need much more then that. My photos are mere eye candy if it went to jury I would guess.
I worked as an EMT for years before doing this gig, so I was able to anticipate the good shots and the one I have of the little girl getting carried on the ped spine board, mother crying and being consoled by a firman is pure eye candy and would sway the strongest of hearts to think out of emotion and not out of rational thought.
But the lawyer calling upon me for photos does not have the little girl as a client so it may not help thier case.
Joe

In my view, It's not your call why they may gain or lose by your pictures. You don't know what else criminally or civilly might be in the works. If you're requested by the courts to hand over X with a nominal fee attached, then ok. Otherwise you're stepping on some process toes you may not be fully aware of.

Here is my advice next time you see a wreck don't take pictures unless you work for a newspaper.

I am still under subpoena to give photos in a liability case from an event I shot 2 years ago. In Florida, you are allowed to charge for preparation time and expense in copying, etc. Having dealt with lawyers in unrelated cases, I know they they can charge up to $1 per page for a photocopy and have that considered reasonable. BS if you ask me. They wanted to view all the photos I took at this event, which was over 1000. I had to de-archive then off old drives and set them up to view, and to package them for transfer. I submitted an invoice for $300. The lawyer baulked at that saying he thought it was way too high. I asked him two questions. First, What did he think was a reasonable price for that? And second, Check around with any local event photography company and ask what they would charge to do something similar and get back with me.

Haven't heard from him since. That was about 6 months ago. The subpoena is still outstanding but since I responded directly to the lawyer, I met the time frame requirements of it. Now I am just wondering how long can he hold me to that subpoena before he has to issue another?

One thing I do know. I am not a charity. I don't work for free and neither do lawyers. If a lawyer expects you to work for free, tell them to pound sand. Issue an invoice and go from there.

I was approached by a lawyer for crash pictures I took a few years back. Lawyer said to name my price - have not heard a word from him since (I am sure he has copies of the images he will just use and not pay for - would not be the first lawyer to overlook the law).
Some posts here may be of help - https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1183220

Just say you accidently deleted them? What will they do now?

As per kouman.

I am not a lawyer but unless you have been subpoena'd for them already I would just delete them.

bigrob wrote in post #14796749
As per kouman.

I am not a lawyer but unless you have been subpoena'd for them already I would just delete them.

Errr, as a lawyer, I would say that probably is not a good alternative. I don't know the specific rules for this particular state, but in general, there can be some fairly substantial penalties for destroying or "losing" evidence in anticipation of litigation. Not just after you have been subpoenaed, but after you have been made aware that the evidence at issue could be relevant to a lawsuit.

If the lawyer told the OP he wanted the photos, and then the OP "lost" them, at the least, I could see the OP being required to have to go to court and explain to the judge what happened to them....or perhaps something worse happening.

Just send him the photos with an reasonable invoice of charges. It all gets billed to the client anyway.