Personal Injury Settlement Lawyer & Injury Attorney

It is not uncommon for lawyers representing victims of a motor vehicle accident to run into a case involving two drivers who have radically different versions of the accident.  Experience on the part of the lawyer and the willingness to fully investigate the circumstances of the accident, including personally viewing the scene of the accident, can make all the difference between a successful recovery and a loss.

This article examines a case where the defense attempted blaming the victim.  The defendant was a driver of a truck who made a left turn into an intersection and struck the victim’s car.  The driver of the car, who was badly hurt in the accident, stated his light was yellow as he went into the intersection.  He admitted to speeding up to make the light.  The defendant stated that his truck had the right of way and that the plaintiff had not only been speeding but that he also went into the intersection against a red light.   The way the intersection lights were programmed a yellow light for the plaintiff would have meant a red turn arrow for the defendant.

This lawsuit involved serious harm to the plaintiff.  The victim was 40 years old at the time of the accident.  He sustained multiple fractures to his left forearm that needed internal fixation surgery.  He also suffered a head laceration that required some twenty staples to close.

The law firm that represented the plaintiff victim in this trucking accident lawsuit did its own investigation of the accident scene.  From its investigation the law firm was able to plot the order of the lights at the intersection.  With that information and the testimony of a driver who had been stopped waiting for the light from the left of the truck driver, the law firm was able to show that the truck driver could not have had a green turn signal.  Even if the victim’s light had been red, the light for the driver to the left of the truck would have turned green before the truck driver’s left arrow would turn green.  And that driver’s light had not turned green yet at the time of the accident.

After learning about the way lights were programmed the next step was to establish the sequence.  This was done by having a Department of Transportation representative testify regarding the timing and sequencing of the lights at the intersection.  The representative’s testimony, when combined with the testimony of the witness who was waiting for a green light from the truck driver’s left, showed that the truck driver could not have had a green left hand turn signal when he took the turn and struck the victim’s vehicle.

The lawsuit went to trial because the insurance company for the defendant would not settle the lawsuit.  It would not settle the case despite the evidence that the law firm had been able to put together.  It would not settle the lawsuit even for the plaintiff’s demand of 0,000 only one day before the trial.  At the conclusion of the trial the jury apportioned 15% of fault for the accident on the plaintiff and 85% of fault for the accident on the defendant.  The law firm was able to report that after accounting for these percentages the victim recovered 7,000.

As this lawsuit shows a complete investigation of the accident scene, one that uncovers the evidence which will show that the accident could not have occurred the way the defendant claims.  This requires the experience and the common sense to know what to look for, and the resources to carry on the investigation the right way.  Then it becomes a matter of combining the details together in the correct sequence.

The case also illustrates how, even given irrefutable evidence that the driver of the truck ran a red left turn arrow and even with the nature and extent of the victim’s injuries, the insurance company refused to settle the case for what turned out to be a very reasonable demand.    Juries do not like to be lied to and they are far too intelligent to not see when the evidence overwhelmingly shows when the defendant is doing just that.

When presented with this insurance company position the attorney representing the victim simply will thoroughly preparing the case for trial and recover as much as possible for the plaintiff by a jury award.  This is the difference an experienced skilled motor vehicle accident attorney can make.

Related External Posts