'Succession' Star Alan Ruck Denies Wrongdoing in Lawsuit Over Pizza Shop Car Crash That Allegedly Left Man Severely Injured
Dec. 28 2023, Published 10:06 a.m. ET
Alan Ruck denied he was responsible for a man being allegedly injured during a recent car crash in Los Angeles.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, the Succession star asked that the suit be thrown out of court.
As we previously reported, back in November, Ruck crashed his truck into a pizza shop in Los Angeles.
The actor was involved in a 4-way crash that occurred around 9pm. Video from the scene showed Ruck’s car partially inside Raffalo’s Pizza at the intersection of La Brea and Hollywood Blvd.
Sources at the scene said two people were injured in the accident but both were “conscious” after getting out of their cars. TMZ reported that no pedestrians were injured in the mayhem.
Aftermath of the crash.
The actor was filmed talking on his cell phone in the moments after the incident. TMZ reported that a surveillance video showed Ruck car colliding with another “vehicle from behind” which caused his car to smash into the pizza spot.
Ruck was driving a Rivian electric truck at the time. According to reports, an internal investigation found the car did not malfunction and did not cause the accident.
Aftermath of the crash.
The car company said it was fully cooperating with authorities who were investigating the situation.
Earlier this month, the driver who Ruck allegedly hit, Horacio Vela, filed a civil lawsuit against Ruck in Los Angeles Superior Court.
In his lawsuit, Vela said he was parked at a red light with Ruck in his car behind him. He said Ruck then slammed into the back of his car despite the light still being red.
Vela said he suffered “severe injuries and damages” from the crash. He claimed to have been transported to a local hospital on the day of the accident.
The lawsuit said Ruck caused him to experience “property damage, costs of past and future medical care, pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, and other consequential damages."
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
In his recent motion, Ruck argued “that [Vela’s] damages, if any, are due in whole or in part to the proximate contributory and comparative fault of Plaintiff and/or third parties, and that the liability of Answering Defendant, which liability is specifically denied, should be reduced or barred in proportion to said fault.”
In addition, Ruck said that he is entitled to an “offset or credit for the full amount of all monies received by Plaintiff, either directly or indirectly, in connection with all insurance claims and settlements.”
Further, Ruck accused Vela or a third party of having failed and neglected to use reasonable to minimize and mitigate the losses, injuries and damages of which Plaintiff complains.”
A judge has yet to rule.
