Negligent Injury

The first step is proving that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. This duty varies depending on the relationship between the parties. A doctor owes a high duty to a patient while a property owner owes a specific duty to an invitee.

We analyze the legal relationship to define the standard of care. For example, a driver has a duty to follow traffic laws and look out for pedestrians. A store owner has a duty to inspect their premises for hidden dangers. We articulate exactly what the defendant should have done under the circumstances to keep the plaintiff safe.

Once the duty is established we must prove it was breached. This involves showing that the defendant’s actions fell below the standard of reasonable care. This is the core of the negligence argument.

We ask what a prudent person would have done in the same situation. If a prudent store manager would have cleaned up a spill within ten minutes but the defendant waited an hour, that delay constitutes a breach. We use surveillance footage and employee logbooks to pinpoint the exact moment the negligence occurred (demonstrating that the failure was not an accident but a choice).

The most complex element is often causation. The defense will argue that the injury was pre-existing or caused by an intervening event. We must prove proximate cause.

This means showing that the injury would not have happened but for the defendant’s breach. We use medical testimony to link the trauma of the accident directly to the specific medical condition the client is suffering from. We must also prove actual damages (medical bills, lost wages and pain) to convert the legal theory into a monetary demand.

Property owners are not insurers of safety but they are responsible for known hazards. 

Negligent injury claims frequently arise from:

• Wet floors without warning signs
• Uneven pavement or broken stairs
• Poor lighting in parking lots or hallways
• Falling merchandise from high shelves

We investigate whether the owner had actual or constructive notice of the danger. Constructive notice means the hazard existed long enough that they should have known about it. We subpoena maintenance records to prove a pattern of neglect.

If a person is assaulted on commercial property (such as a hotel or nightclub), the property owner may be liable for negligent security. This applies if the crime was foreseeable.

We look at crime statistics for the area. If a parking lot had a history of muggings and the owner failed to install cameras or hire guards, they are liable for the subsequent injury. We argue that the owner prioritized profit over the safety of their patrons (allowing a dangerous environment to persist).

While workers compensation covers most on-the-job injuries, it does not cover injuries caused by third parties. If a delivery driver is hit by another motorist or a construction worker is injured by a defective machine manufactured by an outside company, they can file a negligent injury lawsuit.

These third-party claims are valuable because they allow for the recovery of pain and suffering damages which are barred under workers compensation. We identify all potential defendants to maximize the recovery pool for the client.

Jurisdictions differ on how they handle shared blame. In pure comparative negligence states, a plaintiff can recover damages even if they were 99% at fault (though the award is reduced by their percentage of fault).

In modified comparative negligence states, if the plaintiff is found to be 50% or 51% at fault, they recover nothing. This cliff makes the allocation of fault the most critical part of the trial. We fight to keep the plaintiff’s liability percentage at zero. We use accident reconstruction to show that the plaintiff had no time to react and that the defendant’s negligence was the sole proximate cause.

The defense may argue that the plaintiff assumed the risk of the activity. This is common in recreational injury cases like sports or amusement parks.

We challenge the scope of that assumption. A person attending a baseball game assumes the risk of being hit by a foul ball but they do not assume the risk of a grandstand collapsing. We argue that the injury resulted from an extraordinary danger that was not inherent to the activity and therefore could not have been assumed.

When multiple parties are negligent (such as a truck driver and the trucking company), we must determine how liability is split. We navigate the rules of joint and several liability.

This legal doctrine allows the plaintiff to collect the full judgment from any one of the defendants if the others are insolvent. This is vital when one defendant is uninsured. We strategically target the defendant with the deepest pockets and the most insurance coverage to ensure the judgment is actually collectible.

Economic damages are objective financial losses. This includes past medical bills and lost wages. However, the larger component is often future loss.

We hire life care planners to estimate the cost of future surgeries, rehabilitation and in-home care. If the client can no longer work in their chosen profession, we hire vocational experts to calculate the loss of earning capacity. We adjust these figures for inflation to ensure the money lasts as long as the client needs it.

Non-economic damages compensate for pain, suffering, disfigurement and loss of enjoyment of life. These are subjective but often constitute the largest portion of the verdict.

We use day-in-the-life videos to show the jury how the injury has limited the client’s daily activities. We present testimony from family members about the client’s depression and anxiety. By humanizing the suffering, we give the jury a reason to award significant compensation for the human cost of the negligence.

The defense will try to argue that the plaintiff’s pain is due to old age or a prior injury. This is the eggshell plaintiff rule battleground.

The law states that a defendant must take the victim as they find them. Even if the plaintiff was fragile, the defendant is liable for aggravating the condition. We use detailed MRI comparisons to distinguish the new injury from the old condition (proving that the accident caused a distinct and new level of impairment).

We deploy investigators to the scene to take photographs and measurements before conditions change. In slip and fall cases, we measure the coefficient of friction of the floor.

In auto cases, we download the black box data from the vehicle to determine speed and braking patterns. We also scour social media for posts from witnesses or the defendant that might admit fault. This raw data is often the difference between a he-said-she-said stalemate and a clear liability win.

Negligence is often technical. We retain industry-leading experts to explain the standard of care to the jury.

If a staircase collapsed, we call a structural engineer to explain why the maintenance was insufficient. If a product failed, we call a design expert. These experts provide the objective authority needed to counter the defense’s paid consultants. Their testimony bridges the gap between the accident and the breach of duty.

Insurance adjusters are trained to manipulate unrepresented victims. They will ask for a recorded statement hoping the victim will downplay their injuries or admit fault.

We shield our clients from these tactics. We handle all communication with the insurance carrier. We know their playbook (delay, deny, defend) and we counter it with aggressive litigation deadlines. We force them to evaluate the claim fairly by demonstrating that we are fully prepared to take the matter to trial if they lowball the offer.