Articles Posted in Car Accidents

Achieving success in an auto accident case requires many things. One of those things is the ability to locate, collect, and organize all of the evidence that supports your version of the events that led to the collision. You may need photographs, eyewitness accounts, official reports, and expert opinions. A piece of evidence that contains a statement from the other driver that backs up your assertions can be especially helpful. When it comes to amassing all of these pieces of evidence and then putting them together in one cohesive and persuasive case, rely upon the skill and experience of a knowledgeable New York car accident attorney to give your lawsuit what it needs for success.

An example of this type of scenario played out recently in a case from Brooklyn. The case involved an intersection collision between a taxi and a scooter. The two vehicles were traveling in opposite directions on Fifth Avenue in Brooklyn when they collided at the intersection of Park Place.

The scooter driver, Teddy, sued for the injuries he suffered in the accident. Teddy sought summary judgment to hold the taxi driver liable. The scooter driver’s theory of the case was that the taxi driver was in the process of attempting a left turn when he improperly failed to yield the right of way and made an illegal left turn right into the path of Teddy’s scooter.

In New York, blame for rear-end vehicle accidents operates under a specific set of rules. Generally, the rear driver is at fault for the accident because each driver has a legal obligation to operate his vehicle in a safe manner and to maintain a safe following distance behind the vehicle in front of his. If he has rear-ended the vehicle in front of him, it is typically true that, legally speaking, this was a result of the rear driver’s negligence in failing to maintain a safe following distance, and the front driver can potentially recover compensation for her injuries. To make sure you get the compensation that you legally deserve, retain the services of a skilled New York car accident attorney.

Bannelis’ case was an example of a rear-end accident in which there were no special circumstances, and the rear driver was responsible. Bannelis was driving in the Bronx when she was rear-ended, and the accident caused her to suffer injuries that prompted her to sue. While it is generally the case that a rear driver is legally liable for a rear-end crash, that is not always so. In some situations, there are valid non-negligent explanations for a rear-end accident. For example, if a vehicle traveling in open traffic on an expressway stops in the middle of that expressway and is rear-ended, the evidence may indicate that the front driver, rather than the rear one, was negligent for operating in an unsafe manner.

The Appellate Division upheld a trial judge’s decision to award Bannelis summary judgment in her favor, which meant that the defendant was declared legally liable, and that outcome was achieved without the injured woman having to undergo a full trial on the issue of liability.

It is a position in which most drivers have found themselves at some point. You’re trying to turn left onto a busy four-lane road, but the traffic is too heavy. You decide to travel as far as the center turn lane. Drivers in the two lanes nearest you wave you out. So what happens if you go forward and then hit another car in the turn lane? Can you recover damages from that other driver if you’re injured? The answer is “perhaps yes,” as one recent case from the Buffalo area, and the court ruling it produced, demonstrated. One of the key things that you can take away from this situation is that you should never assume you cannot recover damages; always check with a knowledgeable New York car accident attorney first.

The accident that spawned the case took place in heavy traffic along Niagara Falls Boulevard. That stretch of the road had two northbound lanes, two southbound lanes, and a center turning lane. Diane entered the turn lane to make a left turn into a shopping plaza. Angela desired to turn left from a parking lot and get into the southbound lanes. Traffic was too heavy to allow Angela to get directly to the southbound lanes, so, after being waved forward by two stopped drivers occupying the two northbound lanes, Angela pulled into the turn lane. Once in the turn lane, she hit Diane. Angela was injured in the accident.

So, you might wonder, that means that Angela has no chance of recovering compensation for her injuries, right? Not necessarily. Even though Diane had evidence that Angela failed to yield the right-of-way, that was not the end of the case. Angela managed to avoid having her case thrown out on summary judgment because she presented evidence that, aside from the right-of-way issue, Diane committed a violation that played into the crash. Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 1126(c) prohibits drivers from driving in a center turn lane for any distance more than what’s needed to execute a left turn safely. According to Angela’s argument, Diane wasn’t merely using the center lane to turn left; she was using it to get around stopped traffic.

In your personal injury case, document evidence may be a key component of achieving a successful result. To get to that successful outcome, though, you’ll have to make sure that the documents you want to place into evidence are admissible under New York law. Making sure that everything is in place to permit you to introduce all of your evidence is one of many key areas in which it pays to have a skilled New York bicycle accident attorney who is both knowledgeable and experienced in handling injury cases.

In one recent case, it was the defendant’s inability to get in desired evidence that hurt that party’s case. John was a bicyclist biking in the Syracuse area when he was hit by a vehicle driven by Deborah. John sued Deborah and her husband, who owned the vehicle Deborah was driving.

When you sue for the injuries you suffer in your bicycle accident, there may be multiple different options available to the opposition as they try to avoid paying compensation to you. One possibility is simply to assert that you were 100% at fault for the accident, which would mean that you are not entitled to a judgment and recovery. This was the argument advanced by the defense in John’s case.

Here, in the wintertime in New York, there are many hazards for people on the roads. One of those hazards can be trucks engaged in winter weather-related work, like plowing, sanding, salting, or hauling snow. If you’re injured by one of these trucks, your case may potentially be more complex than an ordinary auto accident case. That definitely doesn’t mean that you cannot win and certainly should not deter you from investigating your legal options. An experienced New York auto accident attorney can help you assess your case and the options available to you to achieve a successful result.

Charlie and Shannon were driving in the Town of Amherst when they stopped at an intersection. While they were stopped, a dump truck owned by the town slammed into the pair from the rear. Their case is an example of succeeding even if you’re hit by a governmental vehicle.

When you’re hit by a vehicle that is owned by a governmental entity (such as a town’s dump truck), it is very important to proceed carefully in your case. When the entity you are suing is a governmental one, you may face an argument that the court should use a “reckless disregard” standard, which is much higher than ordinary negligence. That means that, if the court applies the “reckless disregard” standard to your case, it will be more difficult to win. One of the keys to success, then, is persuading the judge that the “reckless disregard” standard should not apply and that the court should use the ordinary negligence standard that applies to almost any other vehicle accident case.

In the aftermath of your accident, there may be many reasons why you might not pursue your legal rights until the eve of the expiration of the statute of limitations. Your injuries (or medical diagnoses) may have continued to evolve, and you may have waited in order to have a clearer idea about the extent of your damages. You may have been working to obtain certain evidence before you filed so that you would know which people and entities to name as defendants. Alternatively, you not may have retained counsel right away. Regardless of the reason, the law gives you a specific period of time to pursue your case, and you are entitled to your opportunity to litigate, regardless of whether you filed five days after your accident or five days before the limitations period expired. When your case involves a statute of limitation dispute or other procedural disputes, it is important to have a knowledgeable New York injury attorney on your side to manage all of the requirements created by the law.

A recent ruling by the Appellate Division focused on this issue of the statute of limitations. The plaintiff in the lawsuit was a man named Amaury. He was injured in a vehicle accident on Sept. 7, 2012. As a result of those injuries, Amaury sued an NYPD officer. The exact details of the vehicle accident weren’t included in the Appellate Division’s opinion because they weren’t really the main issue in the case. The key point of dispute was a procedural one:  namely, whether or not Amaury had waited too long to act.

New York law has established a one-year statute of limitations for injury claims like Amaury’s. On Aug. 25, 2013, the injured man sought to amend his complaint to add an additional defendant, a man named William. In early February 2016, the trial judge approved the request, provided that Amaury properly completed the task of serving notice on William by Feb. 18.

In New York, there are several ways that a person or an entity can be liable in an auto accident involving two or more vehicles. Even if the driver of one vehicle improperly failed to yield the right of way, that does not necessarily mean that that driver is the only person liable to anyone injured in the accident. New York law imposes obligations on all drivers, even after another driver violates the rules of the road. If you’ve been injured as a passenger in an auto accident, you should consult with knowledgeable New York injury counsel who can help you carefully assess your rights and identify all of the people and entities that may owe you compensation as a result of the accident.

One case that presented just such a scenario took place after an accident in a small town near the Finger Lakes. Debra’s child, designated in court papers only as “JTF” because the child was under 18, was involved in a vehicle accident on Route 90. JTF was riding with Cady, who was driving westbound on Route 90, a two-lane road. At the intersection of Salt Road, Cady attempted a left turn. A truck headed eastbound struck the passenger’s side of Cady’s vehicle, injuring JTF.

Debra sued Cady, the driver of the truck, as well as the farm that owned the truck, on behalf of JTF. In an accident involving multiple vehicles in which you are injured as a passenger in one of the vehicles, it is important to analyze your case carefully and make sure that you have included as defendants everyone who might potentially be liable to you for the harm you suffered. Successfully including all of the people and entities that might be at fault and owe you compensation can help enhance your chances of getting a truly full recovery.

When you are injured in an auto accident, there are often several trial strategies that you may to utilize to strengthen your case. You’ll want to make sure that your helpful evidence gets admitted while also exercising the options available to you to keep out potentially harmful evidence. These situations are often ones in which your case can benefit from the skill of an experienced New York car accident attorney.

One case in which this strategy was successfully on display was the injury lawsuit pursued by Mindi, a driver on Long Island. On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, most of the world’s attention was focused upon Lower Manhattan. Coincidentally, just to the east of Manhattan, Mindi was involved in a multi-car chain-reaction accident that same morning while traveling eastbound along the Long Island Expressway. The accident was a four-vehicle collision, with Mindi in the second car of the four. The rear vehicle slammed into the third vehicle, with that impact forcing the third vehicle into the rear of Mindi’s 2000 Ford Taurus. Mindi then crashed into the rear of a tow truck and suffered injuries to both knees as a result of the accident.

Mindi sued Steven, the driver of the last vehicle in the chain reaction, and the corporation that owned the vehicle Steven was driving. By the summer of 2004, Mindi obtained a summary judgment on the issue of liability, meaning that the trial court concluded that there were no relevant issues of fact in dispute, and Steven and the corporation indisputably were negligent.

There are lots of types of evidence that can potentially bolster your case. The best types of proof are those that not only indicate that you should win but also that you should win your case as a matter of law, which means that you win without even having to go to trial. One type of evidence that can help you in that regard is if the driver who hit you was convicted of a Vehicle & Traffic Law violation in connection with the accident. Skilled New York car accident counsel can help you put all of your evidence together to build a winning case.

One example in which a Vehicle & Traffic Law violation was part of the proof was an accident case originating in Ulster County. The case involved John, who was driving northbound. Peter was driving southbound along the same road. At some point, Peter steered his vehicle across the road’s double-yellow line and struck the left front part of John’s vehicle.

John sued for the injuries he suffered as a result of the crash. When you’re suing for injuries caused by an auto accident, there are several hurdles you will need to clear in order to achieve a successful result. One hurdle is not something that you “must” overcome, but it is something that, if you can clear it, offers significant benefit. That hurdle is obtaining a summary judgment in your favor on the issue of liability. This will allow you to hold the other driver liable without having to go through a trial on liability.