Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is required when liability is contested. The defendant will then have the opportunity to respond to the complaint.

New York follows pure comparative fault rules and, when a jury finds that you are responsible for causing a crash the amount of damages awarded will be reduced by your percentage of negligence. This rule is not applicable to the owners of vehicles that are that are leased or rented to minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence suit the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed them a duty to act with reasonable care. Nearly everyone owes this obligation to everyone else, but those who are behind the driving wheel of a motorized vehicle have an even higher duty to the other drivers in their zone of activity. This includes not causing motor vehicle accidents.

In courtrooms, the quality of care is determined by comparing an individual's actions to what a normal person would do under similar circumstances. In the case of medical malpractice, expert witnesses are usually required. Experts with a higher level of expertise of a specific area may be held to the highest standards of care than other people in similar situations.

If someone violates their duty of care, they could cause injury to the victim or their property. The victim must prove that the defendant's breach of their duty led to the damage and injury they sustained. The proof of causation is an essential aspect of any negligence case, and it involves looking at both the actual basis of the injury or damages as well as the proximate reason for the injury or damage.

If someone is driving through the stop sign, they are likely to be hit by another vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be responsible for the repairs. But the actual cause of the accident could be a cut in the brick, which then develops into a potentially dangerous infection.

Breach of Duty

The second aspect of negligence is the breach of duty by a defendant. It must be proven in order to be awarded compensation in a personal injury case. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of a party who is at fault do not match what reasonable people would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for instance has many professional duties towards his patients. These professional obligations stem from the law of the state and licensing authorities. Drivers are required to care for other drivers as well as pedestrians, and to respect traffic laws. If a driver violates this obligation of care and creates an accident, he is responsible for the injuries sustained by the victim.

Lawyers can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to prove the existence of an obligation of care. The lawyer must then prove that the defendant did not comply with the standard in his actions. It is a question of fact for the jury to decide if the defendant complied with the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the breach by the defendant was the main cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For instance it is possible that a defendant crossed a red line, but it's likely that his or her actions wasn't the proximate reason for your bicycle crash. Causation is often contested in crash cases by defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and his or her injuries. If a plaintiff suffered a neck injury in an accident with rear-end damage and his or her attorney will argue that the crash caused the injury. Other factors that are needed for the collision to occur, such as being in a stationary car, are not culpable, and do not affect the jury's determination of the liability.

For psychological injuries However, the connection between a negligent act and the affected plaintiff's symptoms can be more difficult to establish. The reality that the plaintiff experienced a troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with their parents, used alcohol and drugs, or suffered prior unemployment could have a impact on the severity of the psychological issues he or is suffering from following an accident, however, the courts generally view these factors as part of the context from which the plaintiff's accident occurred, rather than as an independent cause of the injuries.

If you've been involved in a serious motor vehicle accident, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP have years of experience representing clients in personal injury commercial and business litigation and motor vehicle accident cases. Our lawyers have established working relationships with independent physicians in various specialties, as well expert witnesses in computer simulations and reconstruction of accident.

Damages

The damages a plaintiff can recover in motor vehicle litigation can include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages is all financial costs that are easily added together and calculated as the total amount, which includes medical expenses and lost wages, repairs to property, and even financial loss, such a diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, such as suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment of living, cannot be reduced to cash. However, these damages must be established to exist by a variety of evidence, such as deposition testimony from plaintiff's close family members and friends, medical records, and other expert witness testimony.

In cases involving multiple defendants, Courts will often use the concept of comparative negligence to decide how much of the damages awarded should be divided between them. The jury must determine the percentage of blame each defendant carries for the accident, and divide the total amount of damages awarded by the percentage. New York law however, doesn't allow this. 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries suffered by driver of these vehicles and trucks. The subsequent analysis of whether the presumption of permissiveness applies is complex and typically only a convincing evidence that the owner has explicitly was not granted permission to operate the car will overcome it.