FREE CASE EVALUATION | 1-800-260-0784

The defendant in an automobile accident lawsuit may also attempt to assert a variety of additional procedural defenses, such as the assertion that the plaintiff’s complaint—the legal document that initiates the case and lays out the allegations—fails to allege a claim at law.

This could indicate that the complainant (or the complainant’s counsel) merely overlooked checking a certain item on a pre-printed complaint form. Another possibility is that the numerous components of a fault idea like carelessness, which establishes culpability in the majority of vehicle accident instances, were not sufficiently described in the complaint while it was being written. Approach a personal injury lawyer in Grand Falls for more information.

Liability or “Fault” Defenses in Car Accidents

Factual defenses to an automobile accident injury claim that are most frequently used involve blame (unless the accident occurred in a no-fault state). By proving that the claimant was genuinely at fault for the collision, either in full or in part, the person who is being held responsible for the mishap frequently tries to reduce their obligation for damages. When it comes to joint responsibility for an accident, states normally adhere to one of two personal injury law principles: contributory negligence or comparative negligence.

A factual defense to responsibility in a case of personal injury is comparative negligence. According to the circumstances of the case, each party responsible for an accident is given a proportion of culpability in jurisdictions that have enacted some kind of a comparative negligence law.

In jurisdictions that practice “pure” comparative negligence, an injured party may file a claim for damages against any third parties who may have contributed to the accident, regardless of the injured party’s own degree of guilt.

In jurisdictions with “modified” comparative negligence, the injured person cannot seek compensation from another at-fault party if they were more than 50% (or more than 80% in some states) at blame for the injury. In either method, a percentage equal to the plaintiff’s proportion of culpability will be deducted from the total amount of recoverable damages. Therefore, if you filed a case for injuries sustained in a car accident and it was found that you were 20% at blame for the collision, the defendant would only be obligated to cover 80% of your total damages.

Note that if you’re the defendant and you act fast enough, you may be able to convince the courts to vacate the entry of default from the court file. Note also that you must have a good enough excuse to do that. Courts tend to vacate the motion of default judgment because they want each case to be decided based on its merits.

You must seek help from a lawyer, if you are dealing with a car accident and are struggling to get the best compensatory amount.