Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog
Even seemingly minor rear-end collisions can cause significant injuries. Although the second driver in a rear-end crash is typically deemed responsible, the first driver must nonetheless prove fault and that the accident caused them to suffer harm in order to recover damages. It is not uncommon in lawsuits arising from rear-end collisions for the defendant to admit fault but to argue that the plaintiff did not actually suffer serious harm as a result of the crash. Recently, a New York court assessed what a defendant must prove to establish they did not cause a plaintiff’s harm in cases arising out of rear-end collisions. If you were hurt in a car crash, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer as soon as possible.
History of the Case
It is reported that the plaintiff was driving her vehicle when it was struck from behind by a car driven by the defendant. The impact caused the plaintiff’s vehicle to propel forward into the car in front of her. She suffered injuries in the accident and subsequently brought negligence claims against the defendant. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the issues of whether the plaintiff’s alleged harm arose out of the accident and whether she suffered a severe injury. The court denied her motion, and she appealed.
Establishing a Car Accident Caused a Serious Injury
On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court erred in denying her motion because she met her initial burden of proof by establishing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury that was causally related to the accident. Further, the defendant argued that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the presence of a triable issue of fact in her opposition.
The appellate court disagreed, noting that contrary to the defendant’s assertions, the evidence she submitted in support of her motion raised triable issues of fact as to whether the collision caused the plaintiff’s harm. Specifically, her expert affirmation noted that the plaintiff’s range of motion decreased significantly after the accident and failed to account for the fact that the plaintiff did not complain of pain before the accident.
Even assuming for argument’s sake that the defendant met her burden of proof, the appellate court noted that the evidence the plaintiff offered in opposition to the defendant’s motion raised a triable issue of fact on the matter of causation. Based on the foregoing, the appellate court affirmed the trial court ruling.
Meet with a Knowledgeable Syracuse Personal Injury Lawyer
Rear-end collisions frequently cause painful and enduring injuries, and they are usually the result of negligent driving. If you were injured in a rear-end car accident, you might be owed compensation, and it is wise to meet with an attorney to discuss your potential claims. The knowledgeable Syracuse personal injury attorneys of DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can advise you of your rights and assist you in seeking the full extent of damages recoverable under the law. You can reach us via our form online or by calling us at 833-200-2000 to set up a conference.