Motor Vehicle Litigation

When liability is contested in court, it becomes necessary to file a lawsuit. The defendant then has the opportunity to respond to the complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that if a jury finds that you are responsible for an accident the damages you incur will be reduced based on your percentage of blame. This rule is not applicable to the owners of vehicles that are which are rented out or leased to minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had the duty of care towards them. This duty is owed to everyone, but those who operate vehicles owe an even higher duty to other drivers in their field. This includes ensuring that they don't cause motor vehicle accidents.

In courtrooms, the quality of care is determined by comparing an individual's actions to what a normal person would do in the same circumstances. In the case of medical malpractice experts are typically required. People with superior knowledge in the field could be held to a higher standard of medical care.

A person's breach of their duty of care could cause harm to the victim or their property. The victim then has to prove that the defendant breached their duty and caused the injury or damages they suffered. Proving causation is a critical element in any negligence case and requires taking into consideration both the real cause of the injury or damages, as well as the causal cause of the injury or damage.

For example, if someone is stopped at a red light then it's likely that they will be hit by another car. If their vehicle is damaged, they will be responsible for the repairs. The reason for a crash could be caused by a fracture in the brick that leads to an infection.

Breach of Duty

A breach of duty by a defendant is the second element of negligence that needs to be proved in order to receive compensation in a personal injury case. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the party at fault are not in line with what a reasonable person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for example is a professional with a range of professional duties towards his patients. These professional obligations stem from state law and licensing bodies. Drivers are obliged to take care of other drivers and pedestrians, as well as to follow traffic laws. If a driver fails to comply with this obligation of care and results in an accident, the driver is responsible for the injuries suffered by the victim.

A lawyer can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to prove the existence of an obligation of care. The lawyer must 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 prove that the defendant's negligence was the main cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. A defendant could have driven through a red light, but that's not what caused the bicycle accident. Because of this, causation is often contested by the defendants in case of a crash.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and their injuries. If the plaintiff suffered a neck injury in an accident that involved rear-end collisions the attorney for the plaintiff will argue that the crash caused the injury. Other factors that contributed to the collision, like being in a stationary vehicle, are not culpable, and will not impact the jury's decision on fault.

It may be harder to establish a causal link between a negligent act and the plaintiff's psychological problems. The fact that the plaintiff suffered from a troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with his or her parents, abused drugs and alcohol or experienced previous unemployment may have some bearing on the severity of the psychological issues is suffering from following an accident, however, the courts typically view these elements as part of the circumstances that caused the accident resulted rather than an independent reason for the injuries.

If you have been in a serious motor vehicle accident It is imperative to consult an experienced attorney. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have years of experience representing clients in motor vehicle accidents cases, business and commercial litigation, as well as personal injury cases. Our lawyers have established working relationships with independent physicians in different areas of expertise as well as experts in computer simulations as well as reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a person can seek both economic and noneconomic damages. The first category of damages covers all monetary costs which can easily be summed up and calculated into a total, such as medical treatments 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, such as suffering and pain, as well as loss of enjoyment of living cannot be reduced to cash. However the damages must be proved to exist with the help of extensive evidence, such as deposition testimony from the plaintiff's family members and close friends medical records, as well as other expert witness testimony.

In cases that involve multiple defendants, Courts will often use the concept of comparative negligence to decide the proportion of damages awarded should be divided between them. The jury must decide the amount of fault each defendant has for the incident, and divide the total damages awarded by the same percentage. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 does not exempt vehicle owners from the rule of comparative negligence in the event of injuries sustained by the drivers of cars or trucks. The subsequent analysis of whether the presumption that permissive use is applicable is a bit nebulous and typically only a clear showing that the owner was explicitly denied permission to operate the car will overcome it.

좋아요 0