Motor Vehicle Litigation
When a claim for liability is litigated then it is necessary to make a complaint. The Defendant will then have the chance to respond to the complaint.
New York follows pure comparative fault rules which means that should a jury find you responsible for a crash, your damages award will be reduced by the percentage of negligence. There is a slight exception to this rule: CPLR SS 1602 excludes owners of vehicles which are rented or leased by minors.
Duty of Care
In a negligence case the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant owed them a duty to act with reasonable care. This duty is owed by everyone, but those who operate a vehicle owe an even higher duty to other drivers in their field. This includes not causing
motor vehicle accident law firm vehicle accidents.
Courtrooms evaluate an individual's behavior to what a typical person would do under similar conditions to determine a reasonable standard of care. Expert witnesses are often required when cases involve medical malpractice. Experts with a superior understanding of specific fields could be held to a higher standard of medical care.
If a person violates their duty of care, they could cause harm to the victim and/or their property. The victim has to prove that the defendant's breach of duty caused the harm and damages they have suffered. Causation is a key element of any negligence claim. It involves proving the actual and proximate causes of the damages and injuries.
For instance, if a driver is stopped at a red light and is stopped, they'll be hit by another car. If their vehicle is damaged, they'll be accountable for the repairs. But the actual cause of the accident could be a cut in bricks, which later turn into a potentially dangerous infection.
Breach of Duty
A breach of duty by a 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 is when the actions taken by the at-fault party fall short of what an ordinary person would do under similar circumstances.
For example, a doctor has several professional duties to his patients stemming from state law and licensing boards. Motorists are required to show care to other drivers and pedestrians to drive safely and observe traffic laws. If a driver fails to comply with this obligation of care and causes an accident, he is accountable for the injury suffered by the victim.
A lawyer can rely on the "reasonable person" standard to establish the existence of a duty of care and then demonstrate that the defendant failed to satisfy the standard through his actions. The jury will decide if the defendant complied with or did not meet the standard.
The plaintiff must also prove that the defendant's breach of duty was the proximate cause of his or her injuries. It is more difficult to prove this than a breach of duty. A defendant could have driven through a red light, however, that's not the reason for your bicycle accident. Because of this, causation is often challenged by defendants in collision cases.
Causation
In motor vehicle cases the plaintiff must prove an causal link between breach of the defendant and their injuries. If the plaintiff sustained neck injuries as a result of an accident with rear-end damage the attorney for the plaintiff would argue that the collision was the reason for the injury. Other factors that are necessary to produce the collision, like being in a stationary vehicle, are not culpable, and do not affect the jury's decision of liability.
For psychological injuries, however, the link between a negligent act and an injured plaintiff's symptoms may be more difficult to establish. The reality that the plaintiff experienced a a troubled childhood, poor relationship with their parents, experimented with drugs and alcohol or experienced previous unemployment may have some impact on the severity of the psychological issues he or suffers from following a crash, but the courts typically look at these factors as part of the circumstances that led to the accident from which the plaintiff's injury resulted rather than an independent reason for the injuries.
If you have been in an accident that is serious to your vehicle it is crucial to speak with a seasoned attorney. Arnold & Clifford LLP attorneys have extensive experience in representing clients in
motor vehicle accidents, commercial and business litigation, and personal injury cases. Our lawyers have developed working relationships with independent medical professionals in a range of specialties, expert witnesses in accident reconstruction and computer simulations as well as with private investigators.
Damages
In motor vehicle litigation, a plaintiff could seek both economic and noneconomic damages. The first type of damages encompasses all financial costs that can be easily added together and calculated as the total amount, which includes medical expenses as well as lost wages, repairs to property, and even the possibility of future financial loss, like the loss of earning capacity.
New York law recognizes that non-economic damages, such as suffering and pain, and loss of enjoyment are not able to be reduced to monetary value. However the damages must be proved to exist by a variety of evidence, such as deposition testimony from plaintiff's family members and close friends medical records, other expert witness testimony.
In cases where there are multiple defendants, courts often use comparative fault rules to determine the amount of damages that should be divided between them. The jury must decide the proportion of fault each defendant is accountable for the incident, and divide the total amount of damages awarded by the same percentage. However, New York law 1602 specifically excludes owners of vehicles from the comparative fault rule in relation to injuries sustained by drivers of the vehicles. The subsequent analysis of whether the presumption of permissive usage applies is complex and typically only a clear evidence that the owner specifically refused permission to operate the car will be sufficient to overcome it.