Reply #142: It's possible both sides are actually insurance companies.

[TexasObserver]

It's common for insurance companies to be subrogated to the rights of their insured, and to "step into the shoes" of the insured for purposes of pursuing litigation. Here's how it works.

Suppose the elderly lady had insurance which covered her medical care which resulted from the accident. Let's say they paid out $150,000 for her resultant care. To the extent they make such payments, they likely own the right to stand in her shoes for purposes of seeking recompense of those dollars. They first make demand upon the insurer for the little girl's parents, and when that is turned down, they file suit in the lady's name, but they are the real party at interest. The elderly woman's health insurer could be pursuing this claim in her name, but for their benefit.

Or, suppose the real party at interest is the hospital. Imagine the hospital bill is huge, and her estate cannot pay. The estate makes a deal with the hospital whereby it assigns the rights of the estate to the hospital, and agrees to cooperate with the prosecution of the civil claim for damages against the child and her parents (and their insurer).

The result is a lawsuit in which the named parties are the little girl and the elderly lady, when in reality, it is a fight between two insurance companies over which side will pay the loss.

Insurance subrogation cases are common. Most of the time, no one except those involved in the suit know this about the case. It is typically forbidden to disclose to the jury such arrangements, because insurers want the jury thinking about the little girl or the elderly woman, not Allstate versus State Farm (names picked only for their high recognition and market penetration).