Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is necessary when liability is contested. The defendant will then be given the opportunity to respond to the complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that, should a jury find you to be responsible for an accident and you are found to be at fault, your damages will be reduced based on your percentage of fault. This rule does not apply to owners of vehicles rented out or leased to minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence case the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant was obligated to exercise reasonable care. Nearly everyone owes this obligation to everyone else, however those who take the car have a higher obligation to others in their area of activity. This includes ensuring that they do not cause car accidents.

Courtrooms examine an individual's conduct to what a typical individual would do in similar circumstances to determine what constitutes a reasonable standard of care. This is why expert witnesses are frequently required in cases involving medical negligence. People with superior knowledge in the field could be held to a higher standard of medical care.

A breach of a person's duty of care could cause harm to a victim, or their property. The victim has to show that the defendant's infringement of their duty led to the injury and damages that they sustained. Proving causation is a critical part of any negligence case, and it involves taking into consideration both the real cause of the injury or damages as well as the proximate cause of the injury or damage.

If someone runs an stop sign then they are more likely to be hit by another vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be responsible for the repairs. However, the real cause of the crash might be a cut or the brick, which then develops into a serious infection.

Breach of Duty

The second element of negligence is the breach of duty committed by the defendant. This must be proved in order to obtain compensation in a personal injury case. A breach of duty is when the actions of the person at fault do not match what an ordinary person would do under similar circumstances.

A doctor, for example, has a number of professional obligations to his patients, which stem from laws of the state and licensing bodies. Drivers are bound to be considerate of other drivers as well as pedestrians, and to follow traffic laws. Drivers who violate this duty and creates an accident is accountable for the injuries sustained by the victim.

A lawyer may use the "reasonable person" standard to prove the existence of a duty of care and then prove that the defendant did not meet that standard in his actions. The jury will decide if the defendant fulfilled or did not meet the standard.

The plaintiff must also establish that the breach of duty by the defendant was the primary cause of the injuries. This is sometimes more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty or breach. A defendant might have walked through a red light but that's not the cause of the crash on your bicycle. The issue of causation is often challenged in cases of crash by defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle accidents, the plaintiff must prove a causal link between breach of the defendant and the injuries. If a plaintiff suffered an injury to the neck in a rear-end accident the attorney for the plaintiff would argue that the accident caused the injury. Other factors that are needed for the collision to occur, such as being in a stationary vehicle, are not considered to be culpable and therefore do not affect the jury's determination of the liability.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between negligence and the injured plaintiff's symptoms may be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff had troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with their parents, abused alcohol and drugs or previous unemployment may have some influence on the severity the psychological problems he or she suffers after a crash, but the courts generally view these factors as an element of the background conditions that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury occurred, rather than as an independent reason for the injuries.

If you've been involved in a serious motor Vehicle Accident Lawsuits vehicle crash it is crucial to consult with an experienced attorney. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have extensive experience representing clients in motor vehicle accident lawyers vehicle accidents, commercial and business litigation, and personal injury cases. Our lawyers have built working relationships with independent doctors in different specialties, as well expert witnesses in computer simulations and reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

The damages plaintiffs can claim in motor vehicle accident lawyer vehicle litigation include both economic and non-economic damages. The first type of damages includes any monetary expenses that can be easily added to calculate the sum of medical treatment loss of wages, property repair, and even future financial losses, like diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages like suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment cannot be reduced to financial value. The proof of these damages is through extensive evidence like depositions of family members and friends of the plaintiff medical records, depositions, or other expert witness testimony.

In cases that involve multiple defendants, Courts will often use the concept of comparative negligence to decide how much of the total damages award should be allocated between them. This requires the jury to determine the degree of fault each defendant incurred in the accident and to then divide the total damages awarded by that percentage of fault. New York law however, does not allow for this. 1602 does not exempt vehicle owners from the rule of comparative negligence in cases where injuries are caused by drivers of cars or trucks. The analysis to determine whether the presumption is permissive or not is complicated. Typically there is only a clear proof that the owner denied permission to the driver to operate the vehicle will overrule the presumption.