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

Motor Vehicle Litigation

When liability is contested, it becomes necessary to start a lawsuit. The defendant has the option to respond to the Complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that when a jury finds you to be at fault for an accident and you are found to be at fault, your damages will be reduced according to your percentage of fault. There is one exception to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes owners of vehicles hired or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a case of negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant was bound by an obligation of care to them. This duty is owed by everyone, but those who operate vehicles owe an even greater obligation to other people in their field. This includes not causing accidents in motor vehicle accident law firms vehicles.

Courtrooms compare an individual's actions to what a typical person would do in similar circumstances to establish what is reasonable standards of care. Expert witnesses are often required in cases involving medical negligence. People with superior knowledge in a certain field may be held to a greater standard of care.

A person's breach of their obligation of care can cause harm to a victim, or their property. The victim must demonstrate that the defendant's violation of their duty resulted in the harm and damages they have suffered. Causation is a key element of any negligence claim. It requires proving both the actual and proximate causes of the injuries and damages.

If someone runs an stop sign, they are likely to be struck by a vehicle. If their car is damaged they'll be accountable for the repairs. The real cause of a crash could be a brick cut that causes an infection.

Breach of Duty

The second aspect of negligence is the breach of duty by the defendant. The breach of duty must be proved in order to receive compensation for personal injury claims. A breach of duty is when the actions taken by the at-fault party do not match what an ordinary person would do in similar circumstances.

A doctor, for instance has many professional obligations to his patients. These professional obligations stem from the law of the state and licensing bodies. Drivers are required to be considerate of other drivers and pedestrians, as well as to respect traffic laws. Drivers who violate this duty and creates an accident is accountable for the injuries sustained by the victim.

Lawyers can use the "reasonable people" standard to establish that there is a duty of care and then show that the defendant did not adhere to this standard with his actions. It is a matter of fact for the jury to decide if the defendant met the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also establish that the breach of duty of the defendant was the main cause of his or her injuries. This can be more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty and breach. For example, a defendant may have run a red light but his or her action was not the sole cause of your bicycle crash. In this way, causation is often contested by the defendants in cases of crash.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between the defendant's breach of duty and the injuries. If a plaintiff suffered neck injuries as a result of a rear-end collision, his or her attorney would argue that the collision was the cause of the injury. Other factors that are needed in causing the collision such as being in a stationary vehicle, are not considered to be culpable and therefore do not affect the jury's decision of liability.

For psychological injuries However, the connection between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms could be more difficult to establish. The fact that the plaintiff had an uneasy childhood, a bad relationship with his or her parents, used alcohol and drugs or had prior unemployment could have a bearing on the severity of the psychological issues he or she suffers after an accident, however, the courts typically view these elements as an element of the background conditions that caused the accident occurred, rather than as an independent reason for the injuries.

If you have been in an accident that is serious to your vehicle it is essential to speak with an experienced attorney. The attorneys at Arnold & Clifford, LLP have years of experience representing clients in personal injury cases, business and commercial litigation and motor vehicle accident attorneys vehicle accident cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent medical professionals across a variety of specialties, expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations, as well as with private investigators.

Damages

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

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, such as suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment cannot be reduced to cash. The proof of these damages is through extensive evidence like depositions from family members and friends of the plaintiff medical records, depositions, or 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. This requires the jury to determine the degree of fault each defendant was responsible for the accident, and then divide the total amount of damages by the percentage of blame. However, New York law 1602 specifically exempts owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule with respect to injuries suffered by driver of the vehicles. The process of determining whether the presumption is permissive or not is complex. The majority of the time it is only a clear evidence that the owner refused permission to the driver to operate the vehicle can overcome the presumption.