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

motor vehicle accident attorney Vehicle Litigation

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

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

Duty of Care

In a negligence case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had an obligation of care to them. Almost everybody owes this duty to everyone else, but individuals who get behind the wheel of a motor vehicle have a greater obligation to other people in their field of activity. This includes ensuring that there are no accidents in motor vehicles.

In courtrooms the quality of care is determined by comparing the actions of an individual against what a normal individual would do under similar conditions. In the event of medical negligence experts are often required. Experts who are knowledgeable of a specific area may also be held to the highest standards of care than other individuals in similar situations.

If someone violates their duty of care, they could cause damage to the victim as well as their property. The victim then has to show that the defendant violated their duty of care and caused the injury or damages they suffered. Causation is a key element of any negligence claim. It requires proof of both the proximate and real causes of the injuries and damages.

For example, if someone is stopped at a red light there is a good chance that they will be hit by a car. If their car is damaged, they will need to pay for repairs. The cause of the crash could be a brick cut that develops into an 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 suit. A breach of duty is when the actions taken by the at-fault person fall short of what a normal person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor has a variety of professional duties towards his patients, which stem from laws of the state and licensing bodies. Drivers have a duty to be considerate of other drivers and pedestrians, and to follow traffic laws. If a driver violates this obligation and causes an accident is responsible for the injuries suffered by the victim.

A lawyer can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to establish the existence of a duty of care and then show that the defendant did not meet the standard in his actions. It is a question of fact for the jury to decide whether the defendant met the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also establish that the defendant's breach of duty was the primary cause for the injuries. This is sometimes more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty and breach. For example an individual defendant could have run a red light but his or her action wasn't the proximate cause of the crash. The issue of causation is often challenged in case of a crash by the defendants.

Causation

In motor vehicle accident lawsuit vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and his or her injuries. If the plaintiff sustained neck injuries in a rear-end accident and his or her attorney will argue that the crash was the cause of the injury. Other factors that contributed to the collision, such as being in a stationary car are not considered to be culpable and will not affect the jury’s determination of the degree of fault.

For psychological injuries However, the connection between a negligent act and the victim's afflictions may be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff had troubles in his or her childhood, had a difficult relationship with their parents, abused alcohol and drugs or had prior unemployment could have a influence on the severity the psychological issues suffers from following a crash, but the courts generally view these factors as an element of the background conditions that caused the accident was triggered, not as a separate reason for the injuries.

It is crucial to consult an experienced attorney should you be involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have years of experience representing clients in Motor Vehicle Accident Attorneys vehicle accidents cases, business and commercial litigation, and personal injury cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent doctors in a wide range of specialties, 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 type of damages is any monetary expenses that can be easily added up and calculated as the sum of medical expenses and 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 like pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life which cannot be reduced to a dollar amount. However the damages must be established to exist using extensive evidence, such as deposition testimony of the plaintiff's close friends and family members medical records, other expert witness testimony.

In cases where there are multiple defendants, Courts will often use comparative negligence rules to determine the percentage of damages award should be allocated between them. The jury must determine the amount of fault each defendant had for the accident and then divide the total damages awarded by the percentage of blame. However, New York law 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries suffered by driver of these trucks and cars. The resulting analysis of whether the presumption of permissive use applies is complicated and typically only a clear proof that the owner has explicitly did not have permission to operate his vehicle will overcome it.