• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Motor Vehicle Litigation

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

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that, if a jury finds that you are responsible for an accident and you are found to be at fault, your damages will be reduced based on your percentage of fault. This rule is not applicable to owners of vehicles which are rented out or leased to minors.

Duty of Care

In a case of negligence the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant owed an obligation of care to them. Most people owe this duty to everyone else, however individuals who get behind the wheel of a motor vehicle have a higher obligation to the other drivers in their zone of activity. This includes ensuring that they don't cause motor vehicle accidents.

Courtrooms compare an individual's actions with what a normal person would do under the same conditions to determine an acceptable standard of care. This is why expert witnesses are often required in cases involving medical malpractice. Experts who have a greater understanding of particular fields may be held to a higher standard of care.

A breach of a person's duty of care can cause injury to a victim or their property. The victim is then required to demonstrate that the defendant did not fulfill their duty and caused the injury or motor vehicle accidents damages they sustained. Causation is a crucial element of any negligence claim. It involves proving the proximate and actual causes of the damages and injuries.

For example, if someone is stopped at a red light there is a good chance that they'll be hit by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be responsible for repairs. The actual cause of the crash could be a brick cut which develops into an infection.

Breach of Duty

A defendant's breach of duty is the second element of negligence that needs to be proved to obtain compensation in a personal injury lawsuit. A breach of duty happens when the actions of a party who is at fault are not in line with what a reasonable person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor has several professional duties to his patients, arising from state law and licensing boards. Drivers have a duty to protect other motorists as well as pedestrians, and to follow traffic laws. If a driver violates this duty and causes an accident is accountable for the injuries sustained by the victim.

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

The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the breach of duty by the defendant was the primary cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This can be more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty and breach. A defendant could have run through a red light however, that's not the reason for the accident on your bicycle. The issue of causation is often challenged in case of a crash by the 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 suffers an injury to the neck in a rear-end accident the attorney for the plaintiff will argue that the crash caused the injury. Other factors that are essential in causing the collision like being in a stationary vehicle, are not culpable and will not affect the jury's determination of the liability.

It may be harder to establish a causal link between a negligent act, and the psychological issues of the plaintiff. The reality that the plaintiff experienced a a troubled childhood, poor relationship with their parents, used alcohol and drugs or had previous unemployment may have some impact on the severity of the psychological issues he or suffers from following an accident, but 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.

If you've been involved in a serious motor vehicle crash, it is important to speak with an experienced attorney. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have years of experience representing clients in motor vehicle accident commercial and business litigation, as well as personal injury cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent doctors in a wide range of specialties and expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations as well as with private investigators.

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff may get both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages is any monetary costs that are easily added up and calculated as a sum, such as medical expenses or lost wages, property repairs, and even future financial losses, like a decrease in earning capacity.

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

In cases where there are multiple defendants, courts typically use the comparative fault rule to determine the amount of damages that should be divided between them. This requires the jury to determine the amount of fault each defendant incurred in the accident and then divide the total damages awarded by that percentage of the fault. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 disqualifies vehicle owners from the rule of comparative negligence in cases where injuries are caused by drivers of trucks or cars. The method of determining if the presumption of permissiveness is complicated. Typically there is only a clear proof that the owner denied permission to the driver to operate the vehicle can overcome the presumption.