Investigators are still sorting though scant evidence after a multi-car collision, which included a school bus, on the Staten Island Freeway.
The wreck happened near exit 10 on the westbound side of the freeway. Only four of the injured victims agreed to be transported to nearby hospitals. The others refused treatment at the scene.
A staggering number of car crash victims refuse medical treatment at accident scenes. They often even refuse medical evaluations. Frequently, adrenaline masks physical pain. Since these victims don't "feel" hurt, they mistakenly believe they are okay. Additionally, accidents trigger endorphin release. These hormones are known as "nature's morphine." In other words, accident victims are often stoned. And, we all know how that feels. Or, at least many of us know that feeling.
There are some practical concerns as well. Good doctors who offer accurate evaluations are not easy to see. That's especially true regarding car crash injuries, many of which are difficult to diagnose. And, no one wants to settle for Dr. Nick. Moreover, these doctor visits aren't free, and many health insurance companies refuse to pay injury-related costs.
A New York personal injury attorney addresses many of these concerns. We aren't doctors, but we know some good ones. These physicians, who focus on injury-related conditions, almost always have time to meet with new patients. Furthermore, since we send letters of protection in these cases, these doctors usually charge nothing upfront for their services.
This legal assistance continues through the physical therapy phase. Frequently, insurance adjusters assign a one-size-fits-all label in these situations. For example, an adjuster might approve five physical therapy appointments for a broken arm, regardless of the injury's severity or the patient's progress. Additionally, many insurance companies only work with designated providers. Ben might be able to help you walk again after a serious broken leg. But, he might not be able to help you concentrate again after a serious brain injury.
Attorneys advocate for victims in these situations. The proper amount of physical therapy from a properly-qualified professional helps ensure complete recovery, or at least the best possible recovery. In the end, that's what everyone wants.
Like pretty much all other bills, doctor and physical therapist bills eventually must be paid. So, maximum compensation is the most critical part of many car wreck claims. Frequently, negligence, which is a lack of care, depends on the applicable standard of care.
Most noncommercial motorists have a duty of reasonable care. They must drive defensively, obey the rules of the road, and avoid accidents if possible.
Driver impairment, which causes about half of all car accidents in New York, almost always constitutes a lack of reasonable care. Alcohol use is one of the best examples.
Alcohol's effects include clouded judgment, a false sense of euphoria, and lack of muscle control. Contrary to popular myth, people don't have to be "drunk" to exhibit these symptoms. Usually, these impairing effects begin with the first drink. In other words, one drink is one too many, if you plan to drive. Evidence of alcohol impairment includes:
If the tortfeasor earlier attended a party where alcohol was served, it's more likely than not that s/he had at least one drink while there. "More likely than not" is the standard of proof in a civil claim. Picture two equally-sized stacks of paper side by side. If I move one sheet from the right to the left, the stack on the left is higher than the one on the right. So, in civil court, a little evidence goes a long way.
Commercial operators, like Uber drivers and bus drivers, often have a higher duty of care. Additionally, these operators must take steps to ensure passenger safety. For example, they must pick up and drop off passengers in safe locations. Dark streets and busy corners are not safe locations.
As mentioned, negligence is basically a lack of care. Drivers breach their duty of care if they violate an applicable safety law or their behavior falls below the acceptable standard. Once again, alcohol illustrates the difference between these two theories of liability.
If the tortfeasor was DUI, s/he could be responsible for damages as a matter of law. The statute establishes the standard of care. So, there's no need to independently prove negligence. This rule, which is called negligence per se, usually applies even if the tortfeasor "beats" the DUI in criminal court.
Ordinary negligence claims are different. The aforementioned duty of care requires motorists to be at their best physically, mentally, and otherwise when they get behind the wheel. People who have been drinking, even a little, are not at their best.
Damages in a negligence claim usually include compensation for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.
Maximum compensation is available if the negligence evidence is strong enough to refute some common insurance company defenses. Cause issues are the most common defense in pile-up wreck claims.
Normally, cause is very straightforward in a car crash claim. The at-fault driver usually plows into the victim's vehicle. Multi-crash claims are different. It's hard to tell which vehicle triggered the wreck. It's also hard to tell which vehicle caused a specific wreck in the chain of events.
This defense is commonly known as the "sink and ink" defense. If an attorney confuses the issue, jurors simply throw up their hands and give up. This defense is often effective in criminal court. The burden of proof is much higher in this forum. The sink and ink defense hardly ever works in civil court, especially if your lawyer simply focuses on the issues.
Injury victims are normally entitled to substantial compensation. For a free consultation with an experienced personal injury attorney in New York, contact the Pianko Law Group, PLLC. Home, after-hours, and hospital visits are available.