Understanding The Basic Defense Strategies That May Be Utilized In Personal Injury Cases

If you have recently been involved in an accident which left you injured, then you may be thinking about filing a personal injury claim in order to obtain compensation for your losses. However, before you jump into the deep end, it is best to learn about defense strategies first, so you can prepare properly for what may be heading your way as a plaintiff. If you are the defendant yourself, then this article will also be a helpful guide that will offer you quite a few tools to build your defense strategy on, in order to avoid being declared (wholly) liable for causing the accident.

Aiming for shared liability by proving the plaintiff also guilty of negligence

The first strategy usually utilized by the defense is trying to blame the plaintiff for the accident that resulted in their injuries. If properly backed up by evidence, this strategy could lead to a portion of the settlement being deducted, which would leave the plaintiff with less compensation. This type of outcome can happen anywhere from pre-trial negotiations to an in-court debate settled by a jury. Regardless, split liability will leave the defense with more and the plaintiff with less.

It should also be noted that the same level of fault can lead to different outcomes between states, since some have set a standard of comparative negligence, while others apply a standard of contributory negligence. Furthermore, if a person has put themselves knowingly at risk and was then involved in an accident and got injured, the entire claim of that plaintiff could simply be denied outright. That is when you need the help from a lawyer.

Let’s take a closer look at comparative negligence

The majority of states inflict judgment based upon the concept of comparative negligence when it comes to personal injury claims and cases. This system works by applying percentages of liability to each involved party and then utilizing those percentages to calculate how much compensation should be given to the plaintiff.

However, there are still differences among these states which are brought on by the different ways in which these states view the idea of comparative negligence. There are two major categories to look at in this case which have brought forth two different judicial systems: pure comparative negligence and modified comparative negligence.

In a state with a pure comparative negligence system, the Personal Injury Lawyer in Oakville or plaintiff will always be able to obtain compensation for their losses, regardless how large the percentage of fault is that they have been found guilty of. This is in contrast to the states in which the modified comparative negligence system has been implemented.