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

motor vehicle accident attorney Vehicle Litigation

When a claim for liability is litigated, it becomes necessary to start a lawsuit. The defendant will then be given the opportunity to respond to the complaint.

New York has a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that, should a jury find you to be at fault for an accident the amount of damages you will be reduced according to your percentage of blame. This rule is not applicable to owners of vehicles that are leased or rented to minors.

Duty of Care

In a case of negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had the duty of care toward them. This duty is owed to all people, however those who drive a vehicle owe an even greater duty to other drivers in their field. This includes ensuring that they do not cause motor vehicle accidents.

Courtrooms examine an individual's conduct with what a normal person would do in similar circumstances to determine what constitutes a reasonable standard of care. In the event of medical malpractice, expert witnesses are usually required. Experts with a superior understanding of a certain field may be held to a greater standard of medical care.

A person's breach of their duty of care could cause injury to a victim or their property. The victim has to show that the defendant's infringement of duty caused the damage and injury they suffered. Causation is a crucial element of any negligence claim. It involves proving both the primary and secondary causes of the injuries and damages.

For instance, if someone runs a red stop sign then it's likely that they'll be hit by a vehicle. If their vehicle is damaged, they will be responsible for the repairs. The actual cause of a crash could be caused by a brick cut that causes an infection.

Breach of Duty

The second element of negligence is the breach of duty by a defendant. It must be proven for compensation for personal injury claims. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the party at fault are not in line with what an average person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor is a professional with a range of professional obligations to his patients that are derived from the law of the state and licensing authorities. Motorists owe a duty care to other drivers and pedestrians on the road to drive in a safe manner and adhere to traffic laws. A driver who breaches this duty and results in an accident is responsible for the injuries sustained by the victim.

Lawyers can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to prove the existence of the duty of care, and then demonstrate that the defendant did not satisfy the standard through his actions. It is a question of fact for the jury to decide if the defendant complied with the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also establish that the breach of duty by the defendant was the proximate cause of the injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For example an individual defendant could have run a red light but the action wasn't the main cause of the crash. 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 connection between the defendant's breach of duty and his or her injuries. If a plaintiff suffered neck injuries as a result of an accident that involved rear-end collisions the attorney for the plaintiff would argue that the collision was the cause of the injury. Other factors that are essential in causing the collision like being in a stationary car, are not culpable and will not affect the jury's determination of liability.

It could be more difficult to establish a causal relationship between a negligent action and the plaintiff's psychological problems. It could be because the plaintiff has a turbulent past, a poor relationship with their parents, or has abused drugs or alcohol.

If you have been in a serious motor vehicle accident it is essential to speak with an experienced attorney. The lawyers at Arnold & Clifford, LLP, have extensive experience in representing clients in personal injury commercial and business litigation and motor vehicle accident cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent physicians in a variety of areas of expertise as well as expert witnesses in computer simulations and reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff can get both economic and non-economic damages. The first type of damages encompasses the costs of monetary value that are easily added together and then calculated into a total, for example, medical treatments or lost wages, repair to property, and even future financial losses, such as diminished earning capacity.

New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, such as suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment cannot be reduced to cash. However, these damages must be proved to exist using extensive evidence, such as deposition testimony from plaintiff's close family members and friends medical records, deposition testimony, motor vehicle Accident and other expert witness testimony.

In the event of multiple defendants, courts will often use comparative fault rules to determine the amount of damages that must be divided between them. The jury must determine how much responsibility each defendant was responsible for the accident and then divide the total damages awarded by the percentage of the fault. New York law however, does not permit this. 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries sustained by drivers of the vehicles. The process of determining whether the presumption is permissive is complex. Typically the only way to prove that the owner was not able to grant permission for the driver to operate the vehicle will be sufficient to overturn the presumption.