Karnes County, TX — July 11, 2024, Michael Rivera and two others were injured in a car accident shortly after 2:45 p.m. along State Highway 123.
According to authorities, 54-year-old Michael Rivera and a 67-year-old woman were traveling in a northbound Kia Sorento on S.H. 123 a little more than half of a mile north of the Farm to Market 3191 intersection when the accident took place. Officials indicate that, due to traveling at speeds unsafe for the wet and rainy conditions, a southbound Chevrolet Camaro occupied by a 20-year-old woman hydroplaned and failed to safely maintain control. It subsequently veered to the left, entering the oncoming lane of the highway. There, it was involved in a head-on collision with the northbound Sorento.
Rivera and the woman who had been a passenger in the Sorento reportedly sustained serious injuries over the course of the accident. The woman from the Camaro suffered minor injuries, as well, according to reports. All three victims were transported to area medical facilities by EMS in order to receive necessary treatment. Additional details pertaining to this incident are not available at this point in time.
Commentary by Attorney Michael Grossman
When a vehicle loses control and crosses into oncoming traffic, the focus often turns to weather conditions. But even on wet roads, it’s worth asking whether the crash was truly about the rain—or whether something else made it impossible to stay in control.
1. Did the authorities thoroughly investigate the crash?
Determining whether speed was the only factor means taking a close look at the scene. Investigators should assess vehicle positions, tire marks, and any evidence of braking or attempted steering correction. Were the vehicles aligned as described? Was there evidence the Camaro hydroplaned, or could something else have caused the loss of control? If the crash scene wasn’t fully documented, then the conclusion might rest too heavily on assumption.
2. Has anyone looked into the possibility that a vehicle defect caused the crash?
Hydroplaning is often blamed on road conditions, but it can also signal problems with the tires, suspension, or braking system. If the Camaro’s tires were overly worn or improperly inflated—or if the stability control system malfunctioned—it could have caused the vehicle to spin out even at moderate speed. Without a thorough mechanical inspection, those possibilities remain unanswered.
3. Has all the electronic data relating to the crash been collected?
The Camaro and the Kia Sorento may both store crash-related data—like vehicle speed, brake input, steering angle, and stability system activity—in the moments before impact. Reviewing that information could confirm whether the Camaro was traveling too fast, or if the vehicle failed to respond to the driver’s efforts to correct it. Dash cams or nearby traffic cameras could also help clarify the sequence of events. If none of this evidence is reviewed, critical context could be missing.
It’s easy to say a crash happened because the road was wet. But real answers come from checking whether the driver, the vehicle, or something else left no margin for error.
Takeaways:
- Investigators need to confirm hydroplaning through physical and situational evidence.
- Tire condition and vehicle systems should be examined for possible defects or failures.
- Electronic crash data can validate whether the vehicle responded to driver input.
call us 
Email Us 
Text us