Notes

20 Tips To Help You Be More Effective At Motor Vehicle Legal
Motor Vehicle Litigation

If liability is contested and the liability is disputed, it is necessary to bring a lawsuit. The defendant will then have the chance to respond to the complaint.

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

Duty of Care

In a negligence suit, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed them a duty to act with reasonable care. The majority of people owe this obligation to everyone else, but individuals who get behind the wheel of a motor vehicle have a greater obligation to the other drivers in their zone of activity. This includes not causing motor vehicle accidents.

Courtrooms examine an individual's conduct to what a typical individual would do under similar conditions to determine reasonable standards of care. This is why expert witnesses are frequently required in cases of medical malpractice. Experts with a higher level of expertise in a particular field may be held to an higher standard of care than other individuals in similar situations.

If a person violates their duty of care, they could cause damage to the victim as well as their property. The victim is then required to prove that the defendant's breach of their duty caused the damage and injury they have suffered. Causation is an important part of any negligence claim. It requires proving both the proximate and actual causes of the injury and damages.

If a driver is caught running an intersection then they are more likely to be struck by another vehicle. If their car is damaged, they'll have to pay for the repairs. However, the real cause of the crash could be a cut in a brick that later develops into a dangerous infection.

Breach of Duty

A defendant's breach of duty is the second element of negligence that must be proven to win compensation in a personal injury claim. A breach of duty happens when the actions of the party at fault do not match what an average person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for instance has many professional duties towards his patients. These professional obligations 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 duty and causes an accident is accountable for the injuries of the victim.

A lawyer may use the "reasonable person" standard to establish the existence of the duty of care, and then demonstrate that the defendant failed to satisfy the standard through his actions. It is a question of fact that the jury has to decide if the defendant fulfilled the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also prove that the breach by the defendant was the direct cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For example the defendant could have crossed a red light, however, the act wasn't the main cause of the crash. The issue of causation is often challenged in crash cases by defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle-related cases, the plaintiff must establish an causal link between defendant's breach and their injuries. If the plaintiff suffered a neck injury in a rear-end accident, his or her attorney will argue that the crash was the cause of the injury. Other factors that are essential for the collision to occur, such as being in a stationary vehicle, are not culpable and will not affect the jury's determination of the liability.


For psychological injuries, however, the link between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms may be more difficult to establish. motor vehicle accident lawsuit missouri city that the plaintiff has a an unhappy childhood, a poor relationship with his or her parents, abused alcohol and drugs, or suffered prior unemployment could have a impact on the severity of the psychological issues he or is suffering from following a crash, but the courts generally view these factors as part of the background circumstances that caused the accident in which the plaintiff occurred, rather than as an independent reason for the injuries.

It is imperative to consult an experienced lawyer should you be involved in a serious car accident. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP have years of experience representing clients in personal injury, commercial and business litigation, and motor vehicle accident cases. Our lawyers have established working relationships with independent physicians with a variety of specialties as well as expert witnesses in accidents reconstruction and computer simulations as well as with private investigators.

Damages

The damages a plaintiff may recover in motor vehicle litigation include both economic and non-economic damages. The first type of damages encompasses the costs of monetary value that can easily be summed up and then calculated into a total, such as medical expenses or lost wages, repair to property, or even a future financial loss, such the loss of earning capacity.

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

In the event of multiple defendants, courts typically apply the rules of comparative fault to determine the amount of damages that must be divided between them. The jury will determine the percentage of fault each defendant has for the incident and then divide the total amount of damages awarded by the percentage. However, New York law 1602 does not exempt vehicle owners from the rule of comparative negligence in the event of injuries sustained by the drivers of trucks or cars. The analysis to determine whether the presumption is permissive is complex. The majority of the time the only way to prove that the owner was not able to grant permission to the driver to operate the vehicle will be able to overcome the presumption.

Read More: https://vimeo.com/707200649