Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is necessary in cases where liability is challenged. The defendant has the right to respond to the Complaint.

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

Duty of Care

In a case of negligence, the plaintiff must show that the defendant had the duty of care toward them. Nearly everyone owes this obligation to everyone else, however those who sit behind the car have a higher obligation to the other drivers in their zone of operation. This includes not causing accidents in motor vehicle accident lawyer vehicles.

In courtrooms the standard of care is established by comparing an individual's behavior with what a normal person would do in similar conditions. In the case of medical malpractice, expert witnesses are usually required. People with superior knowledge in specific fields could be held to a higher standard of treatment.

When a person breaches their duty of care, it may cause injury to the victim or their property. The victim has to prove that the defendant breached their duty and caused the harm or damage that they suffered. The proof of causation is an essential part of any negligence case and involves investigating both the primary cause of the injury or damages as well as the reason for the damage or injury.

For instance, if a person has a red light and is stopped, they'll be struck by another car. If their vehicle is damaged, they will be responsible for the repairs. The actual cause of an accident could be a brick cut that causes an infection.

Breach of Duty

The second element of negligence is the breach of duty by an individual defendant. This must be proved for compensation for personal injury claims. A breach of duty is when the actions taken by the at-fault party are insufficient to what a normal person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for example has many professional obligations to his patients. These obligations stem from the law of the state and licensing bodies. Motorists owe a duty care to other drivers and pedestrians to be safe and follow traffic laws. If a motorist violates this obligation of care and motor vehicle accident creates an accident, he is liable for the victim's injuries.

A lawyer can use the "reasonable person" standard to establish the existence of the duty of care and then demonstrate that the defendant failed to meet that standard in his actions. The jury will determine if the defendant met or did not meet the standard.

The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the defendant's negligence was the primary cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This can be more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty or breach. For example, a defendant may have been a motorist who ran a red light, but the action was not the primary cause of your bike crash. The issue of causation is often challenged in cases of crash by defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff has to establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and their injuries. If a plaintiff suffered a neck injury in a rear-end collision, his or her attorney will argue that the incident was the reason for the injury. Other factors that are necessary to cause the collision, such as being in a stationary vehicle are not considered to be culpable and will not affect the jury's decision to determine the fault.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between negligence and the affected plaintiff's symptoms can be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff had a troubled childhood, poor relationship with his or her parents, was a user of alcohol and drugs, or suffered previous unemployment may have some influence on the severity of the psychological issues she suffers after a crash, but the courts typically consider these factors as an element of the background conditions that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury arose rather than an independent cause of the injuries.

It is essential to speak with an experienced attorney in the event that you've been involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have extensive experience representing clients in motor vehicle accident attorney vehicle accidents cases, business and commercial litigation, as well as personal injury cases. Our lawyers have established working relationships with independent doctors in a variety of specialties, as well experts in computer simulations as well as reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

The damages that plaintiffs can claim in motor vehicle litigation can include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages is any monetary costs that can easily be added to calculate an amount, like medical expenses and lost wages, property repair, and even future financial losses, such as diminished earning capacity.

New York law also recognizes the right to recover non-economic damages such as pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life, which cannot be reduced to a monetary amount. However these damages must be proven to exist through extensive evidence, including deposition testimony from plaintiff's close family members and friends medical records, deposition testimony, and other expert witness testimony.

In cases involving multiple defendants, Courts will often use comparative negligence rules to determine how much of the damages awarded should be divided between them. The jury has to determine the amount of fault each defendant has for the accident, and divide the total damages awarded by the percentage. New York law however, does not allow this. 1602 exempts owners of vehicles from the rule of comparative negligence in the event of injuries suffered by drivers of trucks or cars. The method of determining if the presumption is permissive or not is complex. The majority of the time it is only a clear evidence that the owner was not able to grant permission to the driver to operate the vehicle will overrule the presumption.