A little advice please?

Hello, I am writing to see what anyone else's side of these events are.

Two years ago in Wi, US, my girlfriend was driving to her mom's house. It was in December, and it is Wisconsin, so of course, there was quite a bit of snow out. She was driving behind a truck, which suddenly stopped in the middle of the highway for non-emergency reasons. They wanted to watch their daughter snowmobiling on the side of the road. My girlfriend slammed on her brakes, but was unable to stop due to the icy conditions of the  road. So, naturally, her car was totalled, and their car suffered a minor damage, her car having lifted the bumber off its brackets. The responding officer and two witnesses, which were just a little ways behind her declared that she was not at fault, and, in fact, the only ticket issued was for the driver of the vehicle in front of her, which was a ticket for driving without a license. Noone was hurt more than a minor inconvenience, and the vehicle ahead put there bumper in the trunk and continued on their way. Now shes being sued, two years later, for damages to the vehicle. The first trial found her at 90% fault, so we filed an appeal. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

bamr913:

Now shes being sued, two years later, for damages to the vehicle. The first trial found her at 90% fault, so we filed an appeal. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Is your GF represented by an attorney, either provided by her insuraance company or one that she hired?  On what grounds was the appeal filed? 

bamr913:

The responding officer and two witnesses, which were just a little ways behind her declared that she was not at fault

That's plainly a ludicrous conclusion.  Of course she was at fault.  She was following too closely to keep from rear-ending the other vehicle.  That the road was snowy/icy simply means that she should have left additional room between her car and the vehicle in front of her.

bamr913:

Now shes being sued

"Being sued"?  Since you said a trial occurred, I assume you mean that she was sued.

bamr913:

The first trial found her at 90% fault, so we filed an appeal.

"First trial"?  Was there more than one?  "We filed an appeal"?  Unless you were also a party to the lawsuit, "we" did no such thing.  Only she could have appealed.  On what basis did she appeal?  And why didn't your girlfriend's insurer simply pay the other driver's claim?

bamr913:

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

The rules of this site prohibit giving legal advice, and I can't comment any further without knowing the basis on which your girlfriend is appealing.  As you probably can discern, I doubt your girlfriend has any basis on which to appeal.  While reasonable minds might differ about the percentage of fault attributable to your girlfriend and the other driver, there is no question that she is primarily at fault for following too closely, even if the other driver stopped suddenly in the middle of the highway for no good reason.  Drivers are supposed to leave sufficient room to avoid a collision in such a situation.

bamr913:

Now shes being sued, two years later, for damages to the vehicle.

Where is your gf's insurance company in all this?