4 Common Legal Defenses Used In Pedestrian Accident Claims

Pedestrian accidents are common occurrences on our roads, and they can result in devastating injuries or even death. In some cases, the driver may be at fault, while in others, the pedestrian may bear some responsibility. When a pedestrian is injured in an accident, they may file a claim against the driver’s insurance company to seek compensation for their injuries.

However, not all pedestrian accident claims are straightforward. In many cases, the driver’s insurance company may try to deny liability or reduce the amount of compensation owed to the victim. In these cases, the victim may need to rely on legal defenses to protect their rights and ensure they receive fair compensation for their injuries. In this article, we will explore four common legal defenses used in pedestrian accident claims.

Legal defenses used in pedestrian accident claims include contributory negligence, assumption of risk, lack of duty, and comparative negligence. Contributory negligence occurs when the pedestrian is partially at fault for the accident. Assumption of risk occurs when the pedestrian knowingly takes a risk. Lack of duty is when the defendant did not have a duty to protect the pedestrian. Comparative negligence assigns fault to both parties based on their level of negligence.

4 Common Legal Defenses Used in Pedestrian Accident Claims

Pedestrian accidents are a serious issue that can result in severe injuries, disabilities, or even death. In such cases, the victim has the right to file a claim for compensation against the at-fault party. However, the at-fault party can also use various legal defenses to challenge the plaintiff’s claim. In this article, we will discuss four common legal defenses used in pedestrian accident claims.

Contributory Negligence

Contributory negligence is a legal defense that claims the plaintiff’s actions contributed to the accident. In other words, the plaintiff was partially responsible for the accident and their injuries. If the defendant can prove contributory negligence, the plaintiff’s claim can be dismissed or their compensation reduced.

For example, if the plaintiff was crossing the road outside of a marked crosswalk or while distracted by their phone, they may be considered partially responsible for the accident. However, the defendant must prove that the plaintiff’s actions directly caused or contributed to the accident.

If you are facing such a defense, you should seek legal advice immediately. An experienced pedestrian accident lawyer can help you gather evidence to prove that you were not at fault or that your actions did not contribute to the accident.

Assumption of Risk

Assumption of risk is a legal defense that claims the plaintiff knowingly and willingly exposed themselves to a dangerous situation. In pedestrian accident cases, this defense may be used if the plaintiff crossed the road despite knowing that it was unsafe to do so.

However, the defendant must prove that the plaintiff was fully aware of the risks involved and still chose to proceed. If the defendant cannot prove this, the defense is not valid.

If you are facing an assumption of risk defense, you should consult with a pedestrian accident lawyer. They can help you understand your legal rights and determine whether the defense is valid in your case.

Statute of Limitations

Statute of limitations is a legal defense that claims the plaintiff filed their claim after the prescribed time limit. In pedestrian accident cases, the plaintiff has a limited time to file their claim, usually within two years of the accident.

If the plaintiff files their claim after the statute of limitations has expired, the defendant can use this defense to have the case dismissed. Therefore, it is crucial to file your claim as soon as possible after the accident.

If you are unsure about the statute of limitations in your case, consult with a pedestrian accident lawyer. They can help you determine the deadline for filing your claim and ensure that you meet all the legal requirements.

Comparative Negligence

Comparative negligence is a legal defense that claims both the plaintiff and the defendant were partially responsible for the accident. In such cases, the plaintiff’s compensation is reduced according to their level of fault.

For example, if the plaintiff was jaywalking and the defendant was speeding, the court may determine that the plaintiff was 30% responsible for the accident while the defendant was 70% responsible. The plaintiff’s compensation would then be reduced by 30%.

If you are facing a comparative negligence defense, you should seek legal advice. A pedestrian accident lawyer can help you gather evidence to prove that the defendant was mostly responsible for the accident and minimize your level of fault.

Conclusion

In conclusion, pedestrian accident claims can be complicated, especially when the at-fault party uses legal defenses to challenge the plaintiff’s claim. If you are facing any of these defenses, it is crucial to seek legal advice immediately. An experienced pedestrian accident lawyer can help you understand your legal rights and build a strong case to maximize your compensation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the common legal defenses used in pedestrian accident claims?

In pedestrian accident claims, there are four common legal defenses that defendants may use to dispute liability. The first is contributory negligence, which asserts that the plaintiff’s own actions or behavior contributed to the accident and resulting injuries. For example, the defendant could argue that the plaintiff was jaywalking or distracted while crossing the street.

The second defense is assumption of risk, which suggests that the plaintiff knew or should have known of a potential danger and willingly assumed the risk of injury by continuing to act in a certain way. For instance, if the plaintiff was texting while walking and not paying attention to traffic, the defendant might argue that the plaintiff assumed the risk of getting hit by a car.

How can contributory negligence affect a pedestrian accident claim?

Contributory negligence can have a significant impact on a pedestrian accident claim. If the defendant is successful in proving that the plaintiff’s own actions or behavior contributed to the accident, the plaintiff’s damages award may be reduced or even eliminated. In some states, such as Virginia, contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery, meaning that if the plaintiff is found even one percent at fault, they cannot recover any damages.

However, it’s important to note that in other states, such as California, comparative negligence is used instead. This means that the plaintiff’s damages award will be reduced by the percentage of fault assigned to them. For example, if the plaintiff is found to be 25% at fault, their damages award will be reduced by 25%.

What is the assumption of risk defense in pedestrian accident claims?

Assumption of risk is a legal defense that suggests that the plaintiff knew or should have known of a potential danger and willingly assumed the risk of injury by continuing to act in a certain way. In pedestrian accident claims, this defense may be used if the defendant can show that the plaintiff was aware of the risks involved in their actions and chose to proceed anyway.

For example, if the plaintiff was walking along a busy highway at night wearing dark clothing, the defendant might argue that the plaintiff assumed the risk of being hit by a car. However, it’s important to note that the assumption of risk defense may not always be successful, as it requires the defendant to prove that the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the risks involved.

What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence?

Contributory negligence and comparative negligence are both legal defenses used in personal injury cases to allocate fault between the plaintiff and defendant. The main difference between the two is how they affect the plaintiff’s ability to recover damages.

Contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery in some states, meaning that if the plaintiff is found even one percent at fault, they cannot recover any damages. Comparative negligence, on the other hand, reduces the plaintiff’s damages award by the percentage of fault assigned to them. For example, if the plaintiff is found to be 25% at fault, their damages award will be reduced by 25%.

What should I do if I am accused of contributing to a pedestrian accident?

If you are accused of contributing to a pedestrian accident, it’s important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. An experienced personal injury attorney can help you understand your legal rights and options, and may be able to mount a successful defense against the allegations.

Some possible defenses to contributory negligence include arguing that the plaintiff’s actions were unforeseeable, that the defendant had a duty to avoid the accident regardless of the plaintiff’s actions, or that the plaintiff’s own negligence was the sole cause of the accident. Your attorney can help you determine the best course of action based on the specific circumstances of your case.

What Lawyers WON’T tell you about Car Accident Claims (but I will…)

In conclusion, understanding the four common legal defenses used in pedestrian accident claims is crucial for those seeking justice after being hit by a vehicle. However, it is important to note that each case is unique and may require a different approach. Seeking the assistance of an experienced personal injury attorney can greatly increase the chances of a successful claim. Remember, pedestrians have the right to safety on the roads, and those who negligently cause harm must be held accountable. Stay safe and aware while walking, and know your rights in case of an accident.