Negligence Per Se

This video provides a brief introduction to negligence per se. This subject can be extremely complicated, so it is essential that you seek legal representation if you plan on bringing a negligence per se cause of action.

Negligence per se is a cause of action that a plaintiff can bring in a personal injury case. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant violated a statute. If the plaintiff sues under a negligence per se cause of action, the plaintiff does not have to prove that the defendant was negligent.

There are three elements that the plaintiff must prove in a negligence per se action.

First, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant violated a statute.

Second that the law was designed to protect the welfare of others.

Lastly, that the plaintiff must prove that the plaintiff is a member of the class of persons that the statute is designed to protect.

There are many different statutes that could be used to establish negligence per se in a personal injury action. One very common statute that many plaintiffs use is the one which prohibits drunk driving.

Here, when the defendant’s blood alcohol content is above the legal limit the plaintiff can establish that the defendant broke the law. The plaintiff can establish causation by showing that the defendant caused a crash.

Lastly, the plaintiff in a drunk driving situation is clearly a member of the class that the statute was designed to protect against.

Proving negligence per se is not always as easy as it appears to be.

If your personal injury case is based on the concept of negligence per se you need to hire an experienced personal injury attorney.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group have many years of experience in the personal injury field. We use this experience to help clients gain access to justice in their personal injury cases.

Contact us today if you have any questions about your personal injury case. We offer free case evaluations to individuals who are attempting to determine what their legal rights are.

Standing

In order to have the right to file a lawsuit in court, the plaintiff must have standing. This means that the plaintiff must have some sort of stake in the outcome of the lawsuit. The concept of standing prevents an interested member of the general public from filing a suit because they are just concerned.

The plaintiff must mention three things in their petition in order to show that the plaintiff has standing.

First, the plaintiff must show that the plaintiff has suffered or will suffer some injury. This could be a physical injury, a financial injury or a mental injury. In order to show a physical injury, a plaintiff can introduce medical records or medical bills.

In order to show a financial injury, the plaintiff may bring car repair bills proof of lost wages or rental car bills.

In order to show a mental injury, the plaintiff may bring their psychologist or therapists records.

Another thing that the plaintiff must show is causation. The plaintiff must show that there is a causal link between the defendant’s actions and the plaintiff’s

Lastly, the plaintiff must show that the court can provide a remedy for the plaintiff. This remedy could be in the form of compensation or an injunction.

However, if the court cannot remedy the plaintiff’s problem the plaintiff will not have standing to challenge the suit.

If you have any questions about standing or about what you need to do in order to file a personal injury case against someone who negligently caused a car accident you can contact the experienced personal injury attorneys at Stoy Law Group.

We offer free case evaluations to individuals who are attempting to determine what their legal rights are. During this meeting, one of our personal injury lawyers can explain the steps you need to take in order to prove that you have standing in the case.

Establishing standing is an essential part of your personal injury case.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group can explain the entire process to you in a way that you can understand.

We can use our experience to fight for justice for you.

Causation

This video provides a high level overview of the causation. Causation is one of the elements of negligence.

In their personal injury case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant was the cause of the plaintiff’s injury. If they plaintiff cannot prove this element of their negligence claim the plaintiff cannot recover under a negligence cause of action.

Many defendants attempt to claim that they are not responsible for a plaintiff’s damages because they were not the cause of the injury the plaintiff sustained.

Causation is divided into actual cause and proximate cause. This division often causes confusion for individuals who are involved in a personal injury case. If you find that you are confused about the difference between actual cause and proximate cause you should discuss your situation with a personal injury attorney.

Actual cause (cause in fact) means that the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant rather than another source actually caused the injury.

Courts often use this for test to determine if the plaintiff has proved that the defendant actually caused the plaintiff injury. Under this tests courts consider whether the plaintiff would have been injured regardless of the defendant’s actions.

This video provides some examples of actual cause.

The other category of causation is proximate cause here the courts determine whether the plaintiff’s harm was foreseeable to the defendant.

In order to avoid a defendant’s attempt to avoid liability, it is important for you to hire an experienced personal injury attorney.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group have extensive experience in personal injury law. We can use this experience to help you prove that you are entitled to receive compensation for your injury.

We offer free case evaluations to individuals who are seeking out a personal injury attorney to represent them. During this evaluation we can answer any questions that you may have about what causation is and how we can help you in your personal injury case.

Contact us today, or watch our other videos for explanations of other legal terms.

Statute of Limitations

This video discusses the statute of limitations.

The statute of limitations is basically a legal term for a deadline. The statute sets a deadline for the plaintiff to file suit against the defendant.

After sustaining an injury the plaintiff must file suit against the defendant before the statute of limitations runs. If the plaintiff fails to do so the defendant can raise the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense.

Normally the plaintiff will file an answer to the plaintiff’s complaint along with a motion for summary judgement.

The judge does not have any discretion to allow the plaintiff to continue with the suit if the statute of limitations has ended. This is why it is extremely important to know when the statute of limitations has begun for your personal injury case.

Normally the statute of limitations begins when the injury occurred.

For example, if you were involved in a car accident your statute of limitations would begin on the day that the accident happened.

In medical malpractice cases the “discovery rule” determines when the statute of limitations begins. The discovery rule holds that the statute of limitations begins when the plaintiff learns of the injury they suffered.

For example, if a doctor left a sponge in the plaintiff during a surgery in 2012, but the plaintiff did not discover this negligence until 2015, the statute of limitations does not begin until 2015 even though the negligence occurred in 2012.

If you have been involved in a car accident you need to ensure that you file suit against the responsible party within the statute of limitations.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group have extensive knowledge of personal injury law.

We offer free case evaluations to individuals who are attempting to determine what their legal rights are. During this evaluation, one of our experienced personal injury attorneys can explain what you need to do in order to file your claim within the statute of limitations.

Assumption of the Risk

This video provides an explanation of assumption of the risk. Assumption of the risk is an affirmative defense that defendants often use to attempt to avoid liability in personal injury cases.

It is important for you to know what the legal definition of assumption of the risk is if a defendant is using this doctrine as an affirmative defense.

This video describes two different types of assumption of the risk: expressed and implied.

First the video describes expressed assumption of the risk. Expressed assumption of the risk often occurs when the plaintiff signs a contract that expressly waives the plaintiff’s right to sue the defendant for harm caused by known risks.

This waiver is found in many contracts, so before you sign any documentation it is important to read what you are signing. If you do not read the documentation there is a chance that you could be waiving your rights without even knowing that you are signing a waiver.

There are a few different situations where expressed assumption of the risk cannot be used by a defendant.

One example is lack of capacity.

If the plaintiff lacked capacity to sign the waiver then the defendant cannot use an assumption of the risk affirmative defense. It is specifically important to highlight that individuals who are minors or who have mental illnesses lack legal capacity to sign this type of agreement.

The other type of assumption of the risk is implied assumption of the risk. This occurs when the plaintiff voluntary participates in a known dangerous activity.

If you have any other questions about assumption of the risk or if you would like to speak to an attorney about your personal injury case contact the lawyers at Stoy Law Group.

We offer free case evaluations to individuals who are attempting to determine what their legal rights are.

We would love to fight for the justice you deserve.

Comparative Neglience

This video describes comparative negligence and contributory negligence. Comparative negligence and contributory negligence are two different types of affirmative defenses that a defendant will raise in a personal injury lawsuit.

Defendants use these two affirmative defenses in order to claim that the plaintiff was at least partly responsible for their own injury. In situations where the defendant asserts comparative negligence and contributory negligence the fact finder is charged with assigning who is responsible for the accident.

In order to complete this task, the fact finder will assign a percentage of the liability to each of the parties to the suit.

Each jurisdiction has different laws concerning comparative negligence and contributory negligence.

Some jurisdictions use comparative negligence and others use contributory negligence.

In jurisdictions that use contributory negligence the plaintiff cannot recover any damages from the defendant if the plaintiff was negligent. This means that the plaintiff will receive no compensation if jury assigns any percentage of liability to the plaintiff.

Many people found the contributory negligence rule to be harsh.

Jurisdictions started adopting comparative negligence. In jurisdictions that have adopted comparative negligence the plaintiff can recover even if the plaintiff is partly responsible for the accident. The plaintiff’s recovery depends on the specific type of contributory negligence that the jurisdiction has adopted and the percentage of liability that the fact finder assigned to the plaintiff.

This video provides examples of what a plaintiff could recover in contributory negligence jurisdictions.

These concepts are very complicated.

If you are facing a situation where a defendant is claiming that your damages should be reduced because of comparative negligence or contributory negligence you should speak to an experienced personal injury attorney as soon as possible.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group are happy to answer any questions you have about comparative negligence and contributory negligence. We offer free case evaluations.

During this evaluation we can explain how these two concepts will affect your personal injury case.

Stowers Demand

One question that the lawyers at Stoy Law Group often come across is: “what is a stower’s demand?”  A stower’s demand is a tool that experienced personal injury lawyers use in order to help their clients receive adequate compensation from insurance companies.

This video provides a brief history of the origin of the term “stower’s demand.”

The video also discusses five elements of a stowers demand:

  • demand must be within policy limits
  • liability must be reasonably clear
  • a reasonable insurer would accept the offer
  • the demand must be unconditional
  • the demand must offer a full release

If all five of these conditions are met “stower’s liability” can be triggered.

The video goes on to discuss how the stower’s demand works.

First, the personal injury attorney representing the plaintiff will send a demand letter the at fault parties insurance company. This demand letter includes an offer to settle the case for the policy limits and proof that the damage that the plaintiff suffered exceeds the policy limits.

The demand must also include a deadline.

The insurance company could be liable for the sum of a jury verdict in excess of the policy limit if the insurance company does not pay the amount in the demand letter by the deadline stated in the letter.

If you have been injured in a car accident it is important for you to hire an experienced car accident attorney.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group know how to use tools like the stowers demand. We can use this knowledge to help you fight greedy insurance companies.

Contact the lawyers at Stoy Law Group if you have any questions about how a stower’s demand can be used in your case.

We offer free case consultations to individuals who are attempting to determine what their legal rights are. During this consultation we can explain how we can use tools like the stowers demand to your advantage.

Negligence

The term “negligence” often causes confusion. Negligence is the failure to act as a reasonable person would under same or similar circumstances and this failure results in harm to another individual.

This video is designed to provide the viewer with an accessible definition of this very common legal term.

The video begins by discussing the four elements of negligence:

  • duty
  • breach
  • causation
  • actual harm

In order to recover damages from the plaintiff must prove each of these elements by a preponderance of the evidence.

In other words, the plaintiff must prove that it is “more likely than not” that the defendant was negligent.

The first element of a negligence claim is duty. Generally a person has a duty to act as a reasonable person would under normal circumstances.

When a person does not live up to this duty they have “breached” the duty which is the second element of a negligence claim.

The plaintiff prove the third element of a negligence claim , causation, by showing that the defendant’s breach was the cause of the plaintiffs injury and that the injury was not caused by some other factor.

Look for our other videos that discuss causation more in depth.

Lastly, the plaintiff must suffer some actual damages in order to have a negligence claim.

A negligence cause of action is one of the most common causes of action that is brought after a car accident.

It is important for you to hire a personal injury attorney who can explain legal terms to you in a way where the law is accessible to you.

The lawyers at Stoy Law Group are happy to offer potential clients free case consultations. During this initial meeting, one of our experienced personal injury lawyers will discuss how the law applies to the facts of your case.

Our goal is to do everything we can to get justice for our clients.

Contact the Warriors For Justice if you believe that you have been involved in an accident that was the result of another driver’s negligence.

You deserve to be compensated for your injuries and we are here to help you.