Motor Vehicle Litigation

If liability is contested then it is necessary to make a complaint. The defendant is entitled to respond to the complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that in the event that a jury determines you to be responsible for an accident, your damages will be reduced according to your percentage of blame. There is an exception to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes the owners of vehicles that are hired or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence suit the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant was obligated to exercise reasonable care. This duty is owed by all, but those who operate a vehicle have an even higher duty to others in their field. This includes ensuring that they don't cause accidents with motor vehicles.

Courtrooms compare an individual's actions with what a normal person would do in the same conditions to determine a reasonable standard of care. This is why expert witnesses are often required in cases of medical malpractice. Experts with more experience in specific fields could be held to a higher standard of treatment.

A breach of a person's duty of care may cause injury to a victim or their property. The victim is then required to prove that the defendant acted in breach of their duty and caused the harm or damages they sustained. Proving causation is a critical aspect of any negligence claim which involves taking into consideration both the real causes of the injury damages as well as the proximate reason for the injury or damage.

If someone is driving through a stop sign it is likely that they will be struck by a vehicle. If their car is damaged they will be responsible for repairs. The real cause of an accident could be a brick cut which develops into an infection.

Breach of Duty

A defendant's breach of duty is the second aspect of negligence that has to be proved to obtain compensation in a personal injury lawsuit. A breach of duty is when the actions of the at-fault person do not match what an ordinary person would do under similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor is a professional with a range of professional duties towards his patients. These professional obligations stem from the law of the state and licensing authorities. Motorists are required to show care to other drivers and pedestrians on the road to drive safely and observe traffic laws. If a motorist violates this duty of care and causes an accident, he is accountable for the injuries suffered by the victim.

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

The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the breach by the defendant was the direct 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 his or her action wasn't the proximate cause of the crash. For this reason, causation is frequently disputed by defendants in collision cases.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal connection between the defendant's breach of duty and the injuries. If a plaintiff suffered an injury to the neck in an accident with rear-end damage and his or her attorney would argue that the collision was the reason for the injury. Other elements that could have caused the collision, such as being in a stationary vehicle is not culpable and will not affect the jury's determination of the fault.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between negligence and the injured plaintiff's symptoms may be more difficult to establish. It may be that the plaintiff has had a difficult past, a poor relationship with their parents, or has been a user of alcohol or drugs.

It is imperative to consult an experienced lawyer when you've been involved in a serious accident. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP have years of experience representing clients in personal injury as well as commercial and business litigation, and motor vehicle crash cases. Our lawyers have built working relationships with independent doctors in many areas of expertise as well as expert witnesses in computer simulations and reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

In crystal city motor vehicle accident lawyer vehicle litigation, a plaintiff could seek both economic and noneconomic damages. The first category of damages comprises any financial costs that are easily added up and calculated as an amount, like medical treatment, lost wages, property repairs, and even future financial losses such as diminished earning capacity.

New York law also recognizes the right to recover non-economic damages like the suffering of others and Vimeo the loss of enjoyment of life, vimeo which cannot be reduced to a monetary amount. The proof of these damages is through extensive evidence such as depositions from family members and Vimeo friends of the plaintiff, medical records, or other expert witness testimony.

In cases involving multiple defendants, Courts will often use comparative negligence rules to determine how much of the total damages award should be allocated between them. The jury must determine how much responsibility each defendant was responsible for the incident and then divide the total damages awarded by the percentage of the fault. However, New York law 1602 excludes vehicle owners from the comparative negligence rule in the event of injuries sustained by the drivers of trucks or cars. The subsequent analysis of whether the presumption of permissiveness applies is complex, and typically only a clear proof that the owner was explicitly refused permission to operate the car will be sufficient to overcome it.