Obtaining Compensation After a Pedestrian Accident

To obtain compensation after a pedestrian accident, a San Marcos personal injury lawyer must prove negligence, or a lack of care, by a preponderance of the evidence, or more likely than not. Since driver error causes over 90 percent of the pedestrian accidents in California, one of the two legal theories discussed below is usually available. Both theories are based on a “you break it, you buy it” responsibility principle.

In a perfect world, tortfeasors (negligent drivers) would voluntarily step forward and accept responsibility for their mistakes. But we don’t live in a perfect world, and most people dodge the consequences of their mistakes if possible. Once insurance company lawyers get involved, the situation gets worse. Most insurance companies care nothing about what’s right or fair. They only care about their bottom lines. A San Marcos personal injury lawyer is a valuable advocate and counselor in these situations.

Ordinary Negligence

This doctrine is the foundation of most pedestrian accident claims in California. An ordinary negligence case has four basic elements:

• Duty: Most drivers have a duty of reasonable care to avoid accidents if possible. They must watch out for pedestrians and protect them to the greatest extent possible. No one should be injured walking across the street.
• Breach: Speeding, turning unsafely, and other kinds of aggressive driving breach (violate) the duty of care. So does driver impairment, like driving while intoxicated or fatigued.
• Cause: Legally, cause is a connection between the breach and the damages. Victim/plaintiffs must establish cause-in-fact and foreseeability (possibility) of injury.
• Damages: Compensation in a pedestrian accident claim usually includes money for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering. Usually, pedestrians must sustain a physical injury to obtain this money.

These elements are the minimum. Minimum effort usually generates minimum results. A San Marcos personal injury lawyer must collect sufficient evidence to refute common insurance company defenses, such as comparative fault.

We mentioned crossing the street above. Not all pedestrians cross the street with the light and inside marked crosswalks. If the victim contributed to the crash, the court could reduce, or even eliminate, the victim’s compensation. So, the evidence must clearly place the fault on the tortfeasor (negligent driver).

Negligence Per Se

Negligence per se is a violation of a safety law. Tortfeasors could be responsible for damages as a matter of law if:

• They speed, drive while intoxicated, or violate another safety law, and
• That violation substantially causes injury.

If available, the negligence per se shortcut reduces the time and effort necessary to build a case. As a result, victims get their settlements faster.

Settlements are good for victim/plaintiffs, mostly because a settlement is a final resolution. When insurance companies settle cases, they write checks. They don’t file appeals.

Unfortunately, this doctrine is rarely available. Most emergency responders believe that pedestrian crashes are civil disputes that don’t require police involvement. The good news is that negligence per se is available even if a tortfeasor “beats” the DUI or other case in criminal court. A civil jury determines all the facts in a civil case, including criminal guilt or innocence.

Connect With a Thorough San Diego County Lawyer

Injury victims are entitled to substantial compensation. For a confidential consultation with an experienced personal injury lawyer in San Marcos, contact the Pursley Law Firm. The sooner you reach out to us, the sooner we start working for you.

Source:

sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457520316936