When the jury in a courtroom hears a personal injury case, it learns the argument being made by each of the opposing parties. The defendant’s legal team strives to present a convincing argument. It might use one or more of the 3 following tactics:
The plaintiff is partly to blame.
After getting a claim from the injured victim of an auto accident, a defense team normally checks to see whether or not the victim was wearing a seat belt. Failure to make use of that safety device can count as an act that has contributed to the severity of the victim’s injury. Similarly, someone that has slipped and fallen in a store should save the footwear that he or she was wearing on that day. Otherwise, the defendant’s Personal Injury Lawyer in Richmond Hill could suggest that the plaintiff had failed to put on a sturdy pair of shoes.
The plaintiff had agreed to assume a known risk.
That is usually the argument, if the injured party had chosen to have-a-go at some type of athletic activity. For instance, it could be that the victim/plaintiff had decided to do some water skiing. If that same adventuresome skier had acknowledged an awareness of the risks, then he or she might find it hard to blame the waterfront, skiing facility for difficulties encountered on the water.
Still, It could be that the water skier’s difficulties had nothing to do with the risky nature of his or her chosen activity. Instead, it could be that the boat’s driver took that vessel into an especially choppy body of water. If that same body of water had not been one that welcomed water skiers, then the defendant would have a much weaker case.
The plaintiff failed to mitigate the consequences of his or her injury.
An insurance company has agreed to cover the costs for an injury that resulted from a policyholder’s negligence. Yet it does not want to cover the added expenses that might arise, if the injured victim has failed to seek immediate treatment.
That is why any accident victim ought to get seen by physician as soon as possible, normally within the 24-hour period that follows the accident. Moreover, it is the victim’s responsibility to follow the treatment that has been prescribed by the consulted physician. The treatment is supposed to mitigate the consequences of the injury.
Because lawyers are aware of that possible defense tactic, a majority of them urge their clients to seek out the best medical care. That gives the medical report from the client’s physician a greater amount of weight. Consequently, the defendant’s legal team could experience difficulty, when trying to refute the information in the medical report from the plaintiff’s doctor.