15 Reasons To Not Be Ignoring Motor Vehicle Legal

motor vehicle accident lawsuit Vehicle Litigation

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

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

Duty of Care

In a negligence case the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed them a duty to exercise reasonable care. This duty is owed by everyone, but those who operate a vehicle have an even greater obligation to other drivers in their field. This includes ensuring that they do not cause accidents in motor vehicle accident law firm vehicles.

Courtrooms evaluate an individual's behavior to what a typical individual would do under similar circumstances to establish what is an acceptable standard of care. In the case of medical malpractice experts are often required. Experts with a higher level of expertise in a particular field may also be held to the highest standards of care than other people in similar situations.

A person's breach of their obligation of care can cause harm to a victim, or their property. The victim has to show that the defendant's infringement of their duty resulted in the harm and damages they have suffered. Proving causation is a critical element in any negligence case and requires looking at both the actual reason for the injury or damages, as well as the causal cause of the injury or damage.

If a person is stopped at an stop sign it is likely that they will be struck by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they will be responsible for the repairs. The real cause of the crash could be a brick cut which develops into an infection.

Breach of Duty

A breach of duty by the defendant is the second factor of negligence that must be proved in order to secure compensation in a personal injury suit. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the at-fault person are insufficient to what a normal person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor has several professional obligations to his patients based on laws of the state and licensing boards. Drivers are obliged to be considerate of other drivers and pedestrians, and to follow traffic laws. When a driver breaches this obligation of care and causes an accident, he is responsible for the injuries sustained by the victim.

Lawyers can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to establish the existence of the duty of care and then prove that the defendant failed to meet the standard in his actions. The jury will determine if the defendant met or did not meet the standards.

The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the breach by the defendant was the sole cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It can be more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For example the defendant could have crossed a red line, but the action was not the sole cause of the crash. Causation is often contested in crash cases by defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff has to establish a causal connection between the defendant's breach of duty and his or her injuries. For instance, if a plaintiff sustained an injury to his neck in a rear-end collision and their lawyer could argue that the accident caused the injury. Other factors that contributed to the collision, such as being in a stationary vehicle is not culpable and will not impact the jury’s determination of the fault.

It can be difficult to prove a causal link between an act of negligence and the psychological issues of the plaintiff. The fact that the plaintiff had troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with his or her parents, abused alcohol and drugs or had previous unemployment may have some impact on the severity of the psychological problems he or she suffers after an accident, however, the courts generally view these factors as part of the circumstances that caused the accident in which the plaintiff occurred, rather than as an independent cause of the injuries.

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

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff may be able to recover both economic and noneconomic damages. The first category of damages encompasses all financial costs that can be easily added together and calculated as a total, such as medical treatments as well as lost wages, repairs to property, and even financial losses, such as diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages like suffering and pain, as well as loss of enjoyment of living, cannot be reduced to cash. These damages must be established with a large amount of evidence, such as depositions from family members and friends of the plaintiff or medical records, or other expert witness testimony.

In cases where there are multiple defendants, Courts will often use rules of comparative negligence to determine the proportion of damages awarded should be divided between them. This requires the jury to determine how much fault each defendant had for the accident and then divide the total damages awarded by the percentage of blame. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 exempts owners of vehicles from the comparative negligence rule in the event of injuries caused by drivers of cars or trucks. The process of determining whether the presumption of permissiveness is complicated. In general the only way to prove that the owner denied permission to the driver to operate the vehicle can be able to overcome the presumption.