20 Fun Facts About Motor Vehicle Legal
Motor Vehicle Litigation
If liability is contested and the liability is disputed, it is necessary to make a complaint. The defendant will then be given the opportunity to respond to the complaint.
New York follows pure comparative fault rules which means that if the jury finds you to be the cause of an accident 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 that are rented or leased to minors.
motor vehicle accident lawyer laguna niguel of Care
In a negligence case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed an obligation of care to them. This duty is owed to all people, however those who drive a vehicle owe an even greater obligation to others in their field. This includes not causing car accidents.
Courtrooms evaluate an individual's behavior to what a typical person would do in similar circumstances to determine what constitutes an acceptable standard of care. In the event of medical malpractice experts are typically required. People who have superior knowledge in a particular field can also be held to a higher standard of care than other individuals in similar situations.
A breach of a person's duty of care may cause harm to a victim, or their property. The victim has to prove that the defendant's breach of their duty resulted in the harm and damages they sustained. Causation is a key element of any negligence claim. It requires proving both the actual and proximate causes of the injury and damages.
If someone is driving through the stop sign and fails to obey the stop sign, they could be struck by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be accountable for repairs. The real cause of an accident could be a brick cut that causes an infection.
Breach of Duty
A breach of duty by the defendant is the second element of negligence that needs to be proved in order to receive compensation in a personal injury case. A breach of duty happens when the actions of the party at fault are not in line with what a reasonable person would do in similar circumstances.
A doctor, for instance is a professional with a range of professional duties towards his patients that are derived from laws of the state and licensing bodies. Motorists owe a duty care to other drivers and pedestrians on the road to drive in a safe manner and adhere to traffic laws. If a driver fails to comply with this duty of care and results in an accident, the driver is liable 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 show that the defendant did not satisfy the standard through his actions. It is a matter of fact that the jury has to decide whether the defendant complied with the standard or not.
The plaintiff must also demonstrate that the defendant's negligence was the sole cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This is sometimes more difficult to prove than the existence of a duty or breach. For example the defendant could have crossed a red line, but the action was not the sole cause of your bike crash. This is why causation is frequently disputed by defendants in collision cases.
Causation
In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal connection between the defendant's breach of duty and their injuries. If a plaintiff suffered an injury to the neck in an accident that involved rear-end collisions, his or her attorney will argue that the incident was the reason for the injury. Other factors that are necessary to produce the collision, like being in a stationary car, are not considered to be culpable and therefore do not affect the jury's decision of the liability.
It could be more difficult to establish a causal relationship between a negligent act and the plaintiff's psychological symptoms. The fact that the plaintiff has a an uneasy childhood, a bad relationship with his or her parents, abused drugs and alcohol or experienced previous unemployment may have some influence on the severity of the psychological issues he or suffers following an accident, however, the courts typically consider these factors as part of the circumstances from which the plaintiff's accident occurred, rather than as an independent reason for the injuries.
It is essential to speak with an experienced lawyer when you've been involved in a serious motor accident. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have years of experience representing clients in motor vehicle accidents commercial and business litigation, as well as personal injury cases. Our lawyers have developed relationships with independent physicians with a variety of specialties including expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations, as well as with private investigators.
Damages
The damages plaintiffs can claim in motor vehicle litigation include both economic and non-economic damages. The first type of damages is any monetary costs that are easily added up and calculated as a sum, such as medical expenses or lost wages, property repair, and even future financial losses, such as diminished earning capacity.
New York law also recognizes the right to seek non-economic damages like pain and suffering as well as loss of enjoyment of life, which cannot be reduced to a monetary amount. The proof of these damages is through extensive evidence like depositions of family members or friends of the plaintiff or medical records, or other expert witness testimony.
In cases where there are multiple defendants, Courts will often use comparative negligence rules to determine how much of the total damages award should be allocated between them. The jury will determine the percentage of fault each defendant is accountable for the accident, and divide the total damages awarded by the percentage. However, New York law 1602 exempts owners of vehicles from the rule of comparative negligence in the event of injuries suffered by drivers of cars or trucks. The resulting analysis of whether the presumption of permissive use applies is complex and usually only a clear evidence that the owner has explicitly was not granted permission to operate the car will overcome it.