Motor Vehicle Litigation

If liability is contested then it is necessary to file a lawsuit. The defendant then has the chance to respond to the complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that should a jury find you to be at fault for an accident the damages you incur will be reduced according to your percentage of fault. There is a caveat to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes owners of vehicles which are rented or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence lawsuit the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant owed them a duty to act with reasonable care. This duty is owed to everyone, but people who operate a vehicle have an even higher duty to others in their field. This includes ensuring that they do not cause accidents in motor vehicles.

Courtrooms examine an individual's conduct with what a normal person would do in the same conditions to determine a reasonable standard of care. This is why expert witnesses are frequently required in cases involving medical negligence. Experts who have a superior understanding of a specific area may also be held to the highest standards of care than other individuals in similar situations.

A breach of a person's obligation of care can cause harm to a victim, or their property. The victim has to demonstrate that the defendant did not fulfill their duty and caused the harm or damage that they suffered. Causation is a crucial element of any negligence claim. It requires proof of both the primary and secondary causes of the injuries and damages.

For instance, if someone runs a red light there is a good chance that they'll be hit by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they will be required to pay for repairs. But the reason for the accident could be a cut from a brick that later develops into a deadly infection.

Breach of Duty

A defendant's breach of duty is the second element of negligence that must be proved to obtain compensation in a personal injury claim. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the person at fault fall short of what an ordinary person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor has several professional duties to his patients that are governed by the law of the state and licensing boards. Drivers have a duty to be considerate of other drivers and pedestrians, and to obey traffic laws. A driver who breaches this duty and causes an accident is responsible for the injuries of the victim.

A lawyer can use "reasonable individuals" standard to demonstrate that there is a duty of caution and then show that defendant did not comply with this standard in his conduct. The jury will decide if the defendant complied with or did not meet the standard.

The plaintiff must also prove that the defendant's negligence was the main cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It can be more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. A defendant might have walked through a red light however, that's not the reason for the bicycle accident. For this reason, causation is often challenged by defendants in collision cases.

Causation

In juneau motor vehicle accident attorney vehicle accidents, the plaintiff must prove a causal link between the breach of the defendant and the injuries. For instance, if the plaintiff suffered an injury to the neck as a result of a rear-end collision, his or her lawyer will argue that the accident caused the injury. Other elements that could have caused the collision, like being in a stationary vehicle is not culpable and won't affect the jury's determination of the degree of fault.

For psychological injuries However, the connection between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms could be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff suffered from a troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with his or her parents, abused alcohol and drugs or had prior unemployment could have a influence on the severity of the psychological problems he or suffers from following an accident, but courts generally view these factors as part of the background circumstances that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury was triggered, not as a separate cause of the injuries.

It is imperative to consult an experienced attorney should you be involved in a serious accident. The attorneys at Arnold & Clifford, LLP, have extensive experience in representing clients in personal injury commercial and business litigation, and motor vehicle crash cases. Our lawyers have built working relationships with independent physicians in a variety of specialties, as well experts in computer simulations and reconstruction of accident.

Damages

The damages that a plaintiff can recover in a motor vehicle case include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages encompasses the costs of monetary value that are easily added together and then calculated into an overall amount, including medical treatment as well as lost wages, repairs to property, and even future financial loss, like loss of earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages like suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment of living are not able to be reduced to monetary value. These damages must be established through extensive evidence like depositions from family members and friends of the plaintiff medical records, depositions, or other expert witness testimony.

In cases where there are multiple defendants, courts typically employ comparative fault rules to determine the amount of damages that must be divided between them. The jury has to determine the amount of fault each defendant carries for vimeo.Com the accident and then divide the total amount of damages awarded by the same percentage. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 exempts owners of vehicles from the comparative negligence rule in cases where injuries are sustained by the drivers of trucks or cars. The process to determine if the presumption is permissive or not is complex. Typically it is only a clear evidence that the owner denied permission to the driver to operate the vehicle will be sufficient to overturn the presumption.