Notes

14 Questions You Shouldn't Be Uneasy To Ask Motor Vehicle Legal
Motor Vehicle Litigation

If liability is contested, it becomes necessary to bring a lawsuit. The defendant is entitled to respond to the complaint.

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

Duty of Care

In a negligence lawsuit the plaintiff must show that the defendant was obligated to act with reasonable care. Almost everybody owes this duty to everyone else, however those who are behind the wheel of a motor vehicle have an even higher duty to others in their area of operation. This includes ensuring that there are no accidents in motor vehicles.

Courtrooms compare an individual's actions to what a typical person would do under similar circumstances to determine reasonable standards of care. In the event of medical malpractice experts are typically required. People with superior knowledge in specific fields could be held to a greater standard of care.


A breach of a person's obligation of care can cause harm to the victim or their property. The victim is then required to establish that the defendant's breach of their duty resulted in the harm and damages they sustained. Causation is an important part of any negligence claim. It involves proving both the proximate and actual causes of the injury and damages.

For example, if someone is stopped at a red light, it's likely that they'll be hit by a car. If their car is damaged they will be responsible for the repairs. However, the real cause of the crash might be a cut on bricks that later develop into a serious infection.

Breach of Duty

The second aspect of negligence is the breach of duty committed by the defendant. This must be proved in order to be awarded compensation for personal injury claims. A breach of duty is when the actions of the at-fault person do not match what a normal person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for instance has a variety of professional duties towards his patients, which stem from the law of the state and licensing authorities. Drivers are bound to care for other drivers and pedestrians, as well as to respect traffic laws. If a driver violates this obligation of care and causes an accident, he is accountable for the injuries suffered by the victim.

A lawyer can rely on the "reasonable individuals" standard to show that there is a duty of care and then show that defendant failed to meet the standard in his actions. The jury will decide if the defendant fulfilled or did not meet the standard.

The plaintiff must also prove that the breach by the defendant was the main cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This can be more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty or breach. For example an individual defendant could have crossed a red line, but it's likely that his or her actions wasn't the proximate cause of your bicycle crash. This is why causation is frequently disputed by the defendants in cases of crash.

motor vehicle accident attorney broken arrow

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff has to establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and his or her injuries. If the plaintiff suffered neck injuries as a result of a rear-end accident the attorney for the plaintiff would argue that the accident caused the injury. Other factors that contributed to the collision, like being in a stationary vehicle are not culpable and will not influence the jury's decision to determine the fault.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms may be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff has a an unhappy childhood, a poor relationship with his or her parents, experimented with alcohol and drugs, or suffered prior unemployment could have a influence on the severity of the psychological issues he or is suffering from following an accident, however, the courts typically look at these factors as part of the context that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury arose rather than an independent cause of the injuries.

If you've been involved in a serious motor vehicle crash It is imperative to consult an experienced attorney. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP have years of experience representing clients in personal injury cases, business and commercial litigation and motor vehicle accident cases. Our lawyers have formed working relationships with independent medical professionals in a wide range of specialties including expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations, as well as with private investigators.

Damages

The damages a plaintiff can recover in motor vehicle litigation include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages includes any monetary costs that can easily be added to calculate an amount, like medical treatment loss of wages, property repairs, and even future financial losses, like a decrease in earning capacity.

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

In the event of multiple defendants, courts will often use comparative fault rules to determine the amount of total damages that must be divided between them. The jury must determine how much fault each defendant incurred in the accident and to then divide the total damages awarded by that percentage of the fault. However, New York law 1602 specifically exempts owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries sustained by drivers of these trucks and cars. The resulting analysis of whether the presumption of permissiveness applies is complicated and typically only a clear evidence that the owner explicitly refused permission to operate the car will overcome it.

Read More: https://vimeo.com/706792577