You'd need to hire your own lawyer for any criminal charges, but I'm struggling to understand the concept behind an insurer refusing to hire a lawyer to defend against a civil judgement. Any payout comes from the insurance on the vehicle - it is purely in the insurer's interests to vigorously defend any claim. If they refuse a lawyer then THEY most likely wind up paying out more. Insurance even covers accidents as a result of illegal driving. In fact, all accidents are the result of someone doing something illegal, right? Failure to yield, failure to obey a traffic control device, failure to slow to avoid an accident. Insurance covers accidents caused by OVI and reckless operation too. The only thing insurance won't cover is *intentional" damage. If I get drunk and go drag racing down a street and crash, insurance will cover the crash, because the crash itself was not intentional, ergo, an accident. If I go out, 100% sober, and intentionally drive my car into parked car, then that is NOT covered, and it was an intentional act. Now, if they want to can your ass right afterwards, sure, that's their choice. Some companies do, some companies don't. Most companies would make the best call for the company rather than actively punishing or protecting the employee. High employee-turnover companies that can replace you in a heartbeat will likely kick your ass out the door instantly. For a place that would pay a boatload of money to replace you (think certifications / training / experience etc) they would have to "cut their own nose off to spite their face." If it costs them $1k in extra premiums to keep you, or $30k to train a replacement, what do YOU think they would do?