Motor Vehicle Litigation

If liability is contested then it is necessary to file a lawsuit. The defendant is entitled to respond to the complaint.

New York follows pure comparative fault rules, which means that should a jury find that you are responsible for causing the crash, your damages award will be reduced by your percentage of negligence. There is a caveat to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes the owners of vehicles that are hired or leased by minors.

Duty of Care

In a negligence case the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed them a duty to exercise reasonable care. Nearly everyone owes this obligation to everyone else, however those who are behind the wheel of a motor vehicle have a greater obligation to the people in their area of operation. This includes not causing motor vehicle accidents.

Courtrooms examine an individual's conduct to what a typical individual would do in similar conditions to determine reasonable standards of care. This is why expert witnesses are frequently required in cases involving medical negligence. Experts with a higher level of expertise in a particular field can also be held to a higher standard of care than other people in similar situations.

If a person violates their duty of care, it can cause harm to the victim and/or their property. The victim must prove that the defendant acted in breach of their duty of care and caused the injury or damages they sustained. Causation is a crucial element of any negligence claim. It requires proof of both the proximate and actual causes of the damage and injury.

For example, if someone runs a red stop sign then it's likely that they'll be hit by a vehicle. If their car is damaged they'll be responsible for the repairs. But the actual cause of the crash might be a cut on bricks, which later turn into a deadly infection.

Breach of Duty

The second aspect of negligence is the breach of duty committed by the defendant. This must be proven for compensation for a personal injury claim. A breach of duty occurs when the actions of the party at fault are not in line with what a reasonable person would do in similar circumstances.

For instance, a doctor has a variety of professional duties towards his patients. These obligations stem from laws of the state and licensing bodies. Drivers are obliged to protect other motorists and pedestrians, and to obey traffic laws. Any driver who fails to adhere to this obligation and causes an accident is responsible for the victim's injuries.

A lawyer may use the "reasonable individuals" standard to establish that there is a duty to be cautious and then prove that the defendant did not comply with this standard with his actions. The jury will decide if the defendant fulfilled or did not meet the standard.

The plaintiff must also prove that the breach of duty by the defendant was the sole cause of the plaintiff's injuries. It can be more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. For instance an individual defendant could have been a motorist who ran a red light, motor vehicle however, the act wasn't the proximate reason for your bicycle crash. This is why causation is often challenged by the defendants in cases of crash.

Causation

In motor vehicle cases, the plaintiff has to establish a causal connection between the defendant's breach of duty and the injuries. If a plaintiff suffered neck injuries as a result of an accident that involved rear-end collisions then his or her attorney will argue that the crash was the reason for the injury. Other elements that could have caused the collision, such as being in a stationary car is not culpable and won't affect the jury's decision to determine the degree of fault.

For psychological injuries, however, the link between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms could be more difficult to establish. It may be that the plaintiff has a turbulent background, a strained relationship with their parents, or has used alcohol or motor vehicle drugs.

If you have been in a serious motor vehicle accident it is crucial to speak with an experienced attorney. The attorneys 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 doctors in different areas of expertise as well as expert witnesses in computer simulations and reconstruction of accidents.

Damages

The damages a plaintiff can recover in motor vehicle accident attorney vehicle litigation include both economic and non-economic damages. The first category of damages is any monetary costs that can be easily added to calculate the sum of medical treatment and 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, including pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment, which cannot be reduced to a dollar amount. The proof of these damages is by a wide array of evidence, including depositions of family members and friends of the plaintiff, medical records, or other expert witness testimony.

In the event of multiple defendants, courts will typically apply the rules of comparative fault to determine the amount of damages to be split between them. The jury will determine the amount of fault each defendant carries for the incident, and divide the total amount of damages awarded by the same percentage. However, New York law 1602 specifically exempts owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule in relation to injuries sustained by drivers of the vehicles. The resulting analysis of whether the presumption of permissive usage applies is complex, and typically only a clear evidence that the owner specifically denied permission to operate the car will be sufficient to overcome it.