Common Defenses in Fatal Car Crash Cases

Supposedly, fewer car crashes would be one of the “silver linings” of the dark coronavirus pandemic lockdown cloud. But instead of decreasing, the number of fatal wrecks increased dramatically in 2020. The numbers haven’t gone down much since then. The bad habits that many drivers picked up during the pandemic, such as drinking and driving and speeding excessively, appear to be permanent. Compensation in wrongful death cases is usually very high. Therefore, insurance company lawyers typically fight these cases tooth and nail.

A Sugar Land wrongful death lawyer cannot match an insurance company’s resources. These companies earn over $1 trillion a year, so they can afford to pay high-priced lawyers who scour the facts of a case looking for legal defenses, like the ones discussed below. However, David took out Goliath with nothing but a slingshot, because David had right on his side. Our determination to stand up for families throughout the legal process is our slingshot.

Seat Belt Defense

This defense, which varies in different states, holds victims responsible for their own damages if they weren’t wearing seat belts at the time of the accident.

For many years, the Texas Supreme Court didn’t allow insurance company lawyers to use this defense, and it didn’t matter anyway, because seat belt compliance was so high. However, the Supremes reversed course a few years ago. Furthermore, seat belt use also declined during the pandemic. This bad habit, like other bad pandemic-related driving habits, has persisted well after lockdowns ended.

In Texas, negligent drivers (tortfeasors) aren’t legally responsible for damages if the failure to wear a seat belt substantially caused the victim’s injuries.

To prove this point, the insurance company must introduce specific evidence. General safety statistics are insufficient. Usually, a Missouri City personal injury lawyer counters with evidence that the seat belt wouldn’t have made a difference.

Head injuries are a good example. Usually, the motion of a wreck, as opposed to a trauma impact, causes a head injury.

Comparative Fault

The underlying principle of this defense is similar to the seat belt defense. However, comparative fault affects responsibility for the crash, as opposed to liability for damages.

Tragedies like car wrecks often have multiple causes. Perhaps one driver changed lanes without signaling or looking and the other driver was speeding.

In these cases, the insurance company must convince the judge that the victim’s negligence substantially contributed to the crash. In the above example, if the victim was traveling 5mph over the limit, that excessive speed probably didn’t substantially contribute to the wreck.

If the defense makes it over this hurdle, the jury must divide responsibility on a percentage basis (e.g. 80-20) based on the evidence.

Texas is a modified comparative fault state with a 51 percent threshold. So, if the victim was no more than 49 percent responsible for the wreck, the tortfeasor is liable for a proportionate share of damages.

Reach Out to a Diligent Fort Bend County Attorney

Injury victims are entitled to significant compensation. For a confidential consultation with an experienced personal injury attorney in Missouri City, contact the Henrietta Ezeoke Law Firm. We routinely handle matters throughout the Lone Star State. Virtual, home, and hospital visits are available.

Source:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9042805/