If a driver backed out of a driveway in Montpelier and hit your sister while she was walking to work, the basic claim is against the driver.

If that driver was drunk, high, or impaired by pills, the case can get a lot bigger.

And if the insurance company has been sitting on it for months, that does not mean the claim is dead. It usually means they are stalling, hoping bills, rent, and fear do the work for them.

A sidewalk pedestrian usually starts in a strong position

On a sidewalk, the driver is already in a bad spot.

A person backing out of a driveway onto a public sidewalk near State Street, Main Street, Elm Street, or around the offices and small lots near downtown Montpelier is supposed to yield. Drivers creeping backward out of narrow driveways after a snow season full of rutted edges and dirty sightlines still have to make sure the sidewalk is clear.

"Didn't see her" is not much of a defense.

For an office worker commuting in the morning, that matters. If she was walking her normal route into town and got knocked down on the sidewalk, liability against the driver may be straightforward unless the insurer is trying to manufacture a blame fight.

That happens more than people think.

If the driver was drunk or on pills, the case is not just a normal auto claim

This is where it gets ugly for the driver and potentially better for the injured pedestrian.

Vermont allows punitive damages in the right case. Not in every car wreck. But when someone drives while impaired, especially with facts showing reckless disregard for other people's safety, punitive damages can come into play on top of the usual compensatory damages for medical bills, lost wages, pain, and the rest of the fallout.

If the impairment came from alcohol, there may also be a claim against the bar, restaurant, or other establishment that overserved the driver. That is the dram shop angle. It is not automatic. You need facts showing the place served an already intoxicated person or otherwise violated the rules in a way that connects to the crash.

Same idea if the driver was impaired by medication.

Being "on pills" is not a magic phrase that wins the case by itself. But if the driver was too sedated, too impaired, mixing prescriptions, or driving when they knew damn well they should not be behind the wheel, that can support a stronger civil claim. The key is proving impairment and tying it to the crash.

The DUI case matters, but it does not control everything

If Montpelier police cited or arrested the driver for DUI, that helps.

A criminal DUI case can produce useful evidence: officer observations, field sobriety testing, body cam, statements, toxicology, and sometimes a guilty plea or conviction. All of that can strengthen the civil case.

But here's what most people don't realize: the civil claim does not have to wait forever for the criminal case to finish.

Insurance companies love acting like everyone should just sit quietly until the criminal court does its thing. That is nonsense. The civil side can still move, evidence can still be collected, and the insurer can still evaluate the claim.

A not-guilty result in criminal court also does not automatically kill the injury claim. The standards are different.

Why the insurer has gone silent

Because silence is a tactic.

A pedestrian hit on a sidewalk in Washington County is a dangerous file for an insurance company if impairment is involved. Add missed work, ER treatment, maybe follow-up imaging, physical therapy, and a commute interrupted for weeks, and the value climbs fast.

So adjusters drag their feet. They wait on medical records they already know exist. They stop returning calls. They pretend they are "still investigating" a crash that happened months ago.

Meanwhile, rent is due.

If your sister was already behind and now has missed two weeks of work, the delay is part of the pressure campaign.

What she should be pulling together right now

Not a giant binder. Just the stuff that keeps the claim from getting buried:

• police report number, crash date, driveway address, photos of the sidewalk and driveway, names of any nearby witnesses, all medical visit records and work-loss proof, and any evidence the driver had been drinking or was impaired by medication

In Montpelier, that can include surveillance from downtown businesses, nearby residences, office building cameras, or evidence from a stop at a local bar before the crash.

One Vermont wrinkle people miss

If she was walking to work, this is usually still a third-party injury claim against the driver, not a workers' comp case.

That said, Vermont workers' comp disputes go through the Department of Labor process, and sometimes employers or insurers muddy the waters when an injury happens during a commute or near the workplace. Don't let the auto insurer use that confusion as an excuse to do nothing.

A driveway backing crash on a sidewalk is still a motor vehicle claim.

And if the driver was impaired, it may also be a punitive-damages case and, in the right facts, a dram shop case too.

The insurance company not answering for months is not some neutral administrative delay. It is a bet that your sister needs money faster than she can force the issue.