Dealing with personal injury claims is always challenging for individuals or businesses. Such cases could impact the accused party’s finances, reputation, and peace of mind. That’s why it is advisable for people facing such issues to learn how to defend themselves from the claims.
One can mitigate the potential damage and ensure a fair outcome by learning the applicable defense. Here is a look at some common defenses in personal injury cases that the accused could use to ensure they do not overpay the plaintiff.
Status of Limitation
When it comes to a personal injury case, there is a specific time frame within which the claim can be made, and it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. That means if the plaintiff does not claim during this period, then the defense can use the delay as grounds to dismiss the case. The purpose of the statute of limitation is to protect the defendant from unfair legal action. This is because the relevant evidence might be lost, irretrievable, or obscure after some time.
Additionally, the witnesses’ memories will be less sharp if the incident happened a long ago. A defendant might need an injury lawyer if they are uncertain about their status of limitation. A licensed attorney will listen to their case and give them a clear picture of it and whether they can use the status of limitation to dismiss the case.
Assumption of Risk
Another common defense that defendants can use is the assumption of risk. This legal doctrine prevents individuals from receiving compensation for injuries they sustained in specific situations. This type of defense is only applicable when the injured party exposes themselves to known danger that they know about willingly.
The defense in the case will claim that since the plaintiff understood the risks but took the chance and got injured, it is not the defendant’s fault; therefore, they should not pay. For this defense to work, the defense team has to prove the plaintiff had knowledge of the risk and voluntarily accepted it, whether by conduct, words, or implied.
Comparative Negligence
The cause of the injury sometimes is not solely caused by the accused person; the plaintiff can also share the responsibility. If this is the case, the defense will argue that it is unfair for them to pay the total compensation while the plaintiff’s action also contributed to their injuries. If the defense has evidence on this matter, the court will reduce the amount they must pay and assign a percentage of blame to each party involved.
With this type of defense, the compensation the plaintiff will get from the claim will be lowered by their degree of responsibility. If the plaintiff has a higher fault than the defendant, they might not be compensated.
Pre-existing Condition
In some cases, plaintiffs might have had a pre-existing condition they suffered before the accidents. The defense can use this condition to reduce the compensation they must pay. They can claim that the current health situation of the plaintiff is due to their preexisting condition and not the accident in question.
Remember that, for such claims to be allowed in court, the defense will have to show proof by getting medical records and including expert testimony. They can urge this by claiming the plaintiff’s injuries were not caused by the defendant or that the plaintiff’s past health problems exacerbated them. If the defense presents enough evidence, they might reduce the amount they should pay or forgo the payment altogether.
Unless the defense has been trained to handle personal injury cases, it’s best for them to hire an attorney. Experienced lawyers will listen to the case and tailor their services to suit the needs of their clients. Therefore, they will know the best way to present their case to reduce compensation or dismiss the claim.