Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is required when liability is in dispute. The defendant will then have the chance to respond to the complaint.

New York follows pure comparative fault rules which means that in the event that a jury finds you responsible for the crash, your damages award will be reduced by your percentage of negligence. There is a caveat to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes owners of vehicles which are rented or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a lawsuit for negligence the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant was obligated to exercise reasonable care. This duty is owed by everyone, but those who operate vehicles owe an even greater duty to others in their field. This includes ensuring that they do not cause accidents in motor vehicles.

Courtrooms assess an individual's actions to what a typical person would do under similar circumstances to determine what constitutes a reasonable standard of care. Expert witnesses are often required in cases involving medical negligence. Experts with more experience in a certain field may be held to a higher standard of treatment.

When someone breaches their duty of care, it may cause damage to the victim as well as their property. The victim must show that the defendant's infringement of their duty led to the injury and damages that they sustained. The proof of causation is an essential aspect of any negligence case and involves investigating both the primary cause of the injury or damages and the proximate cause of the injury or damage.

If someone runs an intersection it is likely that they will be hit by a car. If their car is damaged, they will be responsible for the repairs. The 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. It must be proven in order to be awarded compensation for personal injury claims. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the at-fault person do not match what an ordinary person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor, has a number of professional duties towards his patients. These obligations stem from state law and licensing bodies. Motorists owe a duty care to other drivers and pedestrians to drive safely and obey traffic laws. If a driver violates this duty of care and results in an accident, he is accountable for the injury suffered by the victim.

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

The plaintiff must also prove that the breach of duty by the defendant was the primary cause for his or her 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 cause of the crash. Causation is often contested in case of a crash by the defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle-related cases, the plaintiff must prove a causal link between breach of the defendant and their injuries. For example, if the plaintiff suffered a neck injury from a rear-end collision and his or her lawyer might claim that the collision caused the injury. Other elements that are required to cause the collision, such as being in a stationary vehicle are not culpable, and do not affect the jury's decision of liability.

For psychological injuries However, the connection between an act of negligence and an victim's afflictions may 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, was a user of drugs and alcohol or experienced previous unemployment may have some bearing on the severity of the psychological issues suffers following an accident, however, the courts typically consider these factors as an element of the background conditions from which the plaintiff's accident arose rather than an independent reason for the injuries.

If you have been in a serious motor Vehicle accident lawyers vehicle accident it is essential to speak with an experienced attorney. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have extensive experience in representing clients in motor vehicle accident cases, business and commercial litigation, as well as personal injury cases. Our lawyers have built working relationships with independent physicians in a variety of areas of expertise as well as experts in computer simulations and reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff may be able to recover both economic and noneconomic damages. The first type of damages includes any monetary costs that can easily be added to calculate a total, for example, medical expenses and lost wages, property repairs, and even future financial losses, like a diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, like suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment of living cannot be reduced to monetary value. However the damages must be proved to exist through extensive evidence, such as deposition testimony from plaintiff's family members and close friends medical records, deposition testimony, and other expert witness testimony.

In cases where there are multiple defendants, motor vehicle accident lawyers Courts will often use the rules of comparative negligence to determine the percentage of damages awarded should be split between them. This requires the jury to determine how much fault each defendant had for the accident and to then divide the total damages awarded by that percentage of the fault. However, New York law 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries sustained by the driver of those cars and trucks. The process of determining whether the presumption of permissiveness is complex. The majority of the time, only a clear demonstration that the owner refused permission to the driver to operate the vehicle will overcome the presumption.