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

Motor Vehicle Litigation

A lawsuit is necessary when the liability is being contested. The Defendant will then have the chance 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 the amount of damages you will be reduced based on your percentage of fault. There is a slight exception to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes owners of vehicles hired or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a lawsuit for negligence the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant owed them a duty to act with reasonable care. This duty is due to everyone, but those who operate 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 to what a typical person would do under the same conditions to determine reasonable standards of care. Expert witnesses are often required in cases of medical malpractice. Experts who have a greater understanding of particular fields may be held to a greater standard of medical care.

When a person breaches their duty of care, it can cause damage to the victim as well as their property. The victim must prove that the defendant acted in breach of their duty and caused the injury or damages they sustained. The proof of causation is an essential aspect of any negligence claim which involves taking into consideration both the real basis of the injury or damages as well as the proximate cause of the damage or injury.

For instance, if someone is stopped at a red light, it's likely that they will be hit by another car. If their car is damaged they will be responsible for repairs. The cause of an accident 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 needs to be proved in order to receive compensation in a personal injury suit. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the person who is at fault do not match what an ordinary person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a physician has several professional duties to his patients, arising from the law of the state and licensing boards. Drivers are bound to take care of other drivers as well as pedestrians, and to adhere to traffic laws. If a driver fails to comply with this duty of care and creates an accident, he is liable for the victim's injuries.

Lawyers can use the "reasonable individuals" standard to show that there is a duty of caution and then prove that the defendant did not comply with this standard in his actions. It is a matter of fact for the jury to decide if the defendant was in compliance with the standard or not.

The plaintiff must also prove that the defendant's breach was the primary cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For instance, a defendant may have crossed a red line, but his or her action wasn't the proximate cause of your bicycle crash. For this reason, the causation issue is often contested by the defendants in case of a crash.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff must establish a causal link between breach of the defendant and the injuries. If the plaintiff sustained neck injuries in a rear-end accident the attorney for the plaintiff would argue that the collision caused the injury. Other factors that are essential to produce the collision, like being in a stationary car, are not culpable and will not affect the jury's determination of the liability.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between negligence and the victim's afflictions may be more difficult to establish. It could be the case that the plaintiff has a turbulent background, a strained relationship with their parents, motor vehicle accident or has been a user of drugs or alcohol.

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

Damages

In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff may be able to recover both economic and noneconomic damages. The first type of damages is any monetary costs that can easily be added up and calculated as a sum, such as medical expenses or lost wages, property repair and motor vehicle accident even future financial losses like a diminished earning capacity.

New York law also recognizes the right to recover non-economic damages, such as suffering and pain, as well as loss of enjoyment, which cannot be reduced to a dollar amount. The damages must be proven through extensive evidence such as depositions from family members and friends of the plaintiff medical records, as well as other expert witness testimony.

In cases where there are multiple defendants, Courts will often use rules of comparative negligence to determine how much of the damages awarded should be divided between them. This requires the jury to determine the degree of fault each defendant was at fault for the incident and then divide the total amount of damages by the percentage of blame. New York law however, does not allow for this. 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule when it comes to injuries sustained by drivers of those cars and trucks. The method of determining if the presumption of permissiveness is complex. The majority of the time, only a clear demonstration that the owner did not grant permission for the driver to operate the vehicle will overrule the presumption.