Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is required when the liability is being contested. The defendant has the right to respond to the Complaint.

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

Duty of Care

In a case of negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed the duty of care toward them. This duty is due to all, but those who drive a vehicle owe an even higher duty to others in their field. This includes not causing car accidents.

In courtrooms the standard of care is established by comparing an individual's behavior with what a typical person would do in the same circumstances. In cases of medical malpractice, expert witnesses are usually required. People with superior knowledge in the field could be held to a greater standard of care.

If a person violates their duty of care, it may cause injury to the victim or their property. The victim has to show that the defendant's infringement of their duty led to the injury and damages that they have suffered. The proof of causation is an essential element in any negligence case and involves considering both the actual reason for the injury or damages as well as the reason for the damage or injury.

For instance, if a person runs a red light then it's likely that they'll be struck by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be responsible for the repairs. The reason for a crash could be a fracture in the brick that leads to 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 lawsuit. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the party at fault aren't in line with what an average person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for instance, has several professional obligations to his patients based on state law and licensing boards. Motorists owe a duty of care to other drivers and pedestrians to drive safely and obey traffic laws. If a motorist violates this duty of care and creates 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 then demonstrate that the defendant failed to comply with the standard in his actions. It is a matter of fact that the jury has to decide whether the defendant fulfilled the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also prove that the defendant's negligence was the primary cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It can be more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For instance an individual defendant could have crossed a red light, but the action wasn't the proximate cause of your bike crash. Because of this, the causation issue is often contested by defendants in crash cases.

Causation

In motor vehicle accidents, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between breach of the defendant and the injuries. For instance, if a plaintiff sustained neck injuries as a result of an accident that involved rear-ends, his or her lawyer will argue that the accident caused the injury. Other factors that are essential in causing the collision like being in a stationary vehicle, are not culpable and do not affect the jury's decision of the liability.

It is possible to establish a causal relationship between an act of negligence and the psychological symptoms of the plaintiff. The reality that the plaintiff experienced a an unhappy childhood, a poor relationship with his or her parents, was a user of alcohol and drugs, or suffered previous unemployment may have some bearing on the severity of the psychological issues she suffers after a crash, but the courts generally view these factors as an element of the background conditions that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury occurred, rather than as an independent reason for the injuries.

If you have been in an accident involving a Monticello Motor Vehicle Accident Law Firm vehicle that was serious it is crucial to consult an experienced attorney. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP, have extensive experience in representing clients in personal injury cases, business and commercial litigation, and motor vehicle crash cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent medical professionals in a range of specialties, expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations, as well as with private investigators.

Damages

The damages that plaintiffs can claim in newton motor vehicle accident law firm vehicle litigation can include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages includes all monetary costs which can easily be added up and calculated into an overall amount, including medical treatments or lost wages, repair to property, and even financial loss, such a diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, like suffering and pain, as well as loss of enjoyment of life, cannot be reduced to monetary value. The damages must be proven through extensive evidence like depositions from family members and friends of the plaintiff medical records, depositions, or other expert witness testimony.

In the event of multiple defendants, courts will often use comparative fault rules to determine the amount of damages to be split between them. The jury must decide the percentage of blame each defendant carries for the accident, [empty] and divide the total damages awarded by the percentage. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 does not exempt vehicle owners from the rule of comparative negligence in cases where injuries are caused by drivers of cars or trucks. The resulting analysis of whether the presumption of permissive usage is applicable is a bit nebulous, and typically only a clear evidence that the owner was explicitly did not have permission to operate his vehicle will overcome it.