In many cases arising out of car accidents, the defendant will argue that the plaintiff was at fault for the collision and, therefore, should not be awarded damages. While comparative negligence is a valid defense and can diminish or preclude a plaintiff’s recovery of compensation, mere allegations that a plaintiff’s carelessness causes a crash is insufficient to establish fault. This was shown in a recent New York opinion issued in a case arising out of a rear-end collision. If you were hurt in an automobile accident, it is wise to consult a Syracuse personal injury attorney to evaluate what claims you may be able to pursue.
Facts of the Case
It is alleged that the plaintiff’s car was struck in the rear by a vehicle operated by the defendant driver, who was working for the defendant company at the time of the crash. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, alleging their negligence caused her to suffer harm. In the defendants’ answer to the complaint, they asserted an affirmative defense of comparative negligence.
Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a motion asking for summary judgment on the issue of liability and for the dismissal of the comparative negligence defense. The court dismissed the motion as premature, and the plaintiff appealed.
Establishing Comparative Negligence in Car Accident Cases
The appellate court reversed the trial court ruling. The court explained that a driver approaching another vehicle from behind has a duty to maintain a reasonably safe speed and distance in consideration of the current conditions to avoid colliding with the other vehicle. Matters involving a rear-end collision with a vehicle that is stopped or stopping present a prima facie case of negligence of the operator of the rear vehicle. Thus, that operator must provide a non-negligent reason for the accident to refute the inference of negligence.
A plaintiff does not bear the burden of demonstrating the absence of his or her comparative negligence to be entitled to summary judgment on the issue of the defendant’s negligence. Regardless, the matter of a plaintiff’s comparative negligence may be determined in the context of a summary judgment motion where, as in the subject case, the plaintiff seeks dismissal of a comparative negligence affirmative defense.
Here, the plaintiff submitted a police report, affidavits from nonparty witnesses, and her own affidavit, all of which showed, prima facie, that the defendant driver negligently struck her vehicle in the rear while she was stopped, and the defendant driver’s negligence proximately caused the accident. Thus, the court reversed the trial court ruling.
Meet with a Knowledgeable Syracuse Lawyer
Careless drivers often cause accidents, yet in many instances, they attempt to avoid liability for the harm such collisions cause. If you were injured in a rear-end collision, it is smart to meet with an attorney to discuss what damages you may be able to recover. At DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers, our knowledgeable attorneys can advise you of your rights and help you to seek the best result available under the facts of your case. You can contact us via our online form or at 833-200-2000 to set up a conference.