Blog

The process of filing a personal injury claim in New York can be somewhat difficult to follow, especially if you have never filed or have been involved in a personal injury claim before. Moreover, the legal terms associated with personal injury claims can be hard to understand for injury victims and their families. The process of filing a personal injury claim in New York can be somewhat difficult to follow, especially if you have never filed or have been involved in a personal injury claim before. Moreover, the legal terms associated with personal injury claims can be hard to understand for injury victims and their families. In this post, we have defined the most important legal terms associated with personal injury claims so that you can understand the process of filing a claim and recovering damages from the at-fault party. Plaintiff The plaintiff is the person who files a tort claim (also known as a personal injury claim or a civil lawsuit) against another person or entity in order to get compensation for their injuries and/or monetary losses. Defendant The defendant is the person or entity against whom the claim is filed. Negligence It is defined as the failure of a person to exercise a level of care that a reasonably competent and prudent person would have exercised under similar circumstances. Liability It is defined as the state of being responsible for the injuries or losses caused to a person. If a person is deemed liable in a personal injury claim, it means that they can be held financially responsible for the plaintiff’s losses. The concept of liability is based on the principle that under any given situation, people have certain responsibilities and are expected to conduct themselves in such a way that their actions (or failure to act) do not harm others. It is undoubtedly the most important aspect of an NYC personal injury claim, as the plaintiff can recover damages only if they manage to establish the liability of the defendant. Vicarious Liability It is a legal doctrine under which a party with supervisory authority can be held liable for the actions of their subordinates – if it is found that the former had the right, duty, and ability to control the actions of the latter, but failed to do so. It’s generally applicable in commercial truck accident claims, where the truck company can be held liable for the driver’s actions. For instance, if a truck driver is forced to drive for more than 14 hours by the trucking company – in violation of hours of service rules – and if the driver causes an accident as a result of fatigue, the trucking company can be held liable, since the accident could have been prevented if the trucking company had not overworked the driver. Proximate Cause It is the event or the actions of a party without which the plaintiff would not have been injured. It is commonly referred to as the ‘but for’ rule. If the accident would not have happened and if the plaintiff would not have been injured, but for the actions of the defendant, the defendant’s actions (or failure to act, depending on the circumstances) can be considered the proximate cause for the accident. It should be noted that proximate cause need not necessarily be the only cause of the accident. Under New York personal injury law, a defendant’s actions can be considered the proximate cause if they substantially contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries. For example, if Driver A is rear-ended by Driver B, and if Driver A crashes into a tree and suffers injuries as a result, Driver B’s actions can be considered the proximate cause, even though Driver A was injured as a result of crashing into the tree. This is because it is reasonable to assume that Driver A would not have crashed into the tree but for the actions of Driver B. Compensatory Damages It refers to the amount of compensation given to the plaintiff in an NYC personal injury claim. It generally covers the economic as well as non-economic losses caused to the plaintiff as a result of the accident. Common economic losses that a plaintiff can be compensated for include: Cost of medical treatment Cost of rehabilitation Cost of long-term care (if the injury leads to a physical or cognitive disability) Lost wages Loss of earning capacity Property damage Common non-economic losses that a plaintiff can be compensated for include: Pain and suffering Emotional anguish Significant disfigurement Diminished quality of life Compensatory damages are awarded for the purpose of restoring the plaintiff (to the extent possible) to the position they would have been in, had it not been for the accident. Under New York law, there is no cap on the number of compensatory damages that can be awarded to a plaintiff in a tort claim. The more severe the injuries, the larger the compensation is likely to be. It should be noted that compensatory damages are not awarded based on speculations. The plaintiff has a duty to explain (with evidence) how much they have lost and stand to lose in the future due to their injuries. Only an experienced New York personal injury attorney can accurately determine the value of a claim, collect the evidence needed to prove the extent of economic and non-economic losses suffered by the plaintiff, and recover an appropriate amount of damages. This is why personal injury victims are generally advised to get legal representation as soon as they can after the accident. Punitive Damages It refers to the damages awarded to the plaintiff in addition to compensatory damages. Punitive damages are only awarded under rare circumstances, which include: If the defendant is found to have acted with malicious intent and if their actions resulted in serious, life-altering injuries for the plaintiff If the defendant is found to have acted with utter disregard for the plaintiff’s health and safety It should be noted that, unlike compensatory damages, a plaintiff is not entitled to receive punitive damages. Only the jury or judge can decide whether punitive damages should be awarded to the plaintiff and the amount of compensation to be awarded. Unlike compensatory damages, punitive damages are not meant to compensate the plaintiff for their injuries and other losses. Instead, they are awarded for the explicit purpose of punishing the defendant for their utterly reckless or malicious actions and to make sure they do not make the same mistakes again. Comparative Negligence It is a legal concept under which the plaintiff can also be held partially responsible for the accident in which they were injured or suffered monetary losses. Under New York personal injury law, the plaintiff’s compensation will be reduced based on the extent to which they were responsible for the accident. For instance, if it is deemed that a plaintiff was 30% at fault for the accident, and if they are awarded a sum of $100,000, they will only receive $70,000. This is pretty logical, right? Statute of Limitations It is the deadline within which the plaintiff is required to file a claim against the defendant. The statute of limitations for filing an NYC personal injury claim – except medical malpractice claims – is three years – starting from the date on which the accident happened. For medical malpractice claims, the statute of limitations is two years and six months from the date on which the plaintiff was injured or harmed. Discovery It is one of the steps involved in a New York personal injury case. It is a process through which both the parties (the plaintiff and the defendant) can exchange case-related information with each other. It is done to make sure one party does not blindside or ambush the other party at the trial by producing a surprise witness or documentary evidence that the other party is not aware of. Settlement It is the process through which the plaintiff and the defendant can settle their case out of court and avoid a lengthy and expensive legal battle. During settlement negotiations, the plaintiff is usually represented by their New York personal injury attorney, and the defendant is represented by the insurance advisor assigned by their insurance provider. If the plaintiff’s attorney and the insurance adjuster manage to reach an agreement, the case will be settled out of court. The plaintiff will accept the settlement amount offered by the insurance company and in return give up their right to sue the defendant. If, on the other hand, they do not manage to reach an agreement, the case will proceed to trial. Judgment It is the official decision made by the jury or the judge in a New York personal injury case. It usually specifies the following things. Whether the defendant is liable for the injuries and other losses suffered by the plaintiff Whether the plaintiff’s own actions contributed to the accident The amount of compensation that must be paid to the plaintiff The number of punitive damages that must be paid to the plaintiff (if awarded by the jury or the judge) Looking to File a New York Personal Injury Claim? We Can Help You! At Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolff, LLP, we are committed to helping personal injury victims get the compensatory damages (and punitive damages, if applicable) they deserve. Over the last 98 years, we have successfully handled a large number of personal injury claims and have recovered over a billion dollars in damages for our clients. We have the expertise, resources, and connections needed to take up all kinds of personal injury cases – regardless of how complicated they might be. To discuss your case with one of our experienced New York personal injury lawyers, call Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolff, LLP today at 212-344-1000 or contact us online for a free and confidential consultation.

A lawyer asks the judge to reconsider his ruling. The judge refuses and inform the attorney that if he does not like his ruling he can take it up on appeal. Can a judge say this? The Judge can Refuse to Reconsider The answer is yes; a judge can make a snap decision and stick to it such as this. For instance, your lawyer is questioning a witness, the defense objects to a particular question, the judge says, "objection sustained", and stops the witness from answering the question. Here the judge has made a snap decision about whether your lawyer can question the witness about a particular topic. If your lawyer does not like the judge's ruling, can he ask the judge to reconsider his ruling? Yes, you lawyer can ask the judge to reconsider. However, what is the likelihood of the judge reversing his decision, immediately after he has ruled that the lawyer cannot ask that question? The chances are extremely small. This is just human nature and it is unfortunate. When your lawyer raises the argument for the judge to reconsider, and starts to whine and complain, what is the judge most likely going to do? This can be compared to a child, who is clearly upset and complaining, and the adult ignoring the child. However, here the judge cannot ignore the attorney and has to provide guidance. The judge can tell the attorney that if he does not like his ruling, the attorney can take this up on appeal, if he loses the case. The Judge has to make Quick Decisions During the course of trial when an attorney objects, the judge has to make a snap decision about whether to allow a particular question to be answered, or whether to allow a particular piece of evidence to be presented to the jury. Now, if the lawyer has case point to support his position, he can present it to the judge. The lawyer can tell the judge that he has certain case(s) on point that supports his position about why he can ask the witness these particular questions. This will put the judge in a bit of a quandary. Should he take the time to actually read and analyze the cases that the lawyer is talking about, or should he simply stick to the ruling that he has already given and allow the case to move forward. Well, it can go either way, and it will mainly depend on the case and point raised by the lawyer. The Judge is More Likely to Reconsider if the Lawyer Presents Case Points If the lawyer is able to put forward important case points while asking the judge to reconsider, then there is more likelihood of the judge reconsidering his decision. The judge will at least listen to what the attorney has to say, and he might even take time to analyze the case points presented by the lawyer who wants to derive this information out of the witness, if the judge feels they are important to the case. However, the judge is also entitled to simply reject all case points, adhere to his original ruling, and inform the attorney to proceed.

Judge Controls all Trial Proceedings At a trial of a personal injury case, which can be an accident case, medical malpractice case, or even a wrongful death case, the judge will be in charge of supervising and controlling the courtroom. In every instance, the judge will instruct the jury not to discuss the case amongst themselves during any of the breaks. The judge will make it clear to the jurors that they are not to talk about the case during the breaks and when they leave for the day. Why does the judge give this instruction to the jury? Why Jurors cannot Discuss the Case during Breaks? The judge gives this particular instruction because the jury has not yet heard all the information regarding the case, they have not yet heard all the testimonies, they have not yet heard all the legal arguments, and most importantly the jury has not yet been informed about the legal instructions that the judge gives them at the very end of the trial. The judge does not want the jurors to start discussing the situation between themselves, what the different testimonies might mean. One juror might ask the other, what he thinks about a particular witness and his testimony. The jurors are likely to have many questions based upon their initial gut feelings, and the moment people start talking about their impressions, it will color their thinking. It is like when you come out after seeing a movie and you listen to people giving their opinions about the movie, and this may change what you originally thought about the movie when it ended. During the trial, the jury goes to the jury room for a break, and the jurors will sit and chat with each other. In such a scenario, they are most likely to talk about the case. Therefore, specifically judge will instruct jury not to discuss the case amongst themselves during these breaks. The judge does not want the jury to go ahead and get initial impressions from different jurors, as each one chimes in their opinions about a particular witness or about a particular cross-examination question and so on. The judge does not want the jurors to talk about the case because they have not heard everything yet. This does seem sort of illogical but it is the rules. What if a jury member wants to confirm someone’s name or a fact about the testimony? You have to take exceptional notes so you do not have these questions. Yes, this does seem like backward logic but it is the rules. The judge will instruct jurors to hold their thoughts until the very end of the case. Once they have heard the entire case, all the testimonies, and all the legal instructions pertaining to the case, then they can go to the jury room and begin deliberating. This is the time when they can start exchanging ideas about who is right and who is wrong, and whether the victim has been able to show them that he is more likely right than wrong. Therefore, in all civil matters in New York, the judge will instruct jury not to discuss the case amongst themselves until the end of trial. Then it is time for them to deliberate over the case.

During the course of a personal injury trial, which can be medical malpractice case, accident case, or even a wrongful death case, what happens if a juror wants to use the bathroom? If the juror needs to go to the bathroom in the middle of the trial proceedings, can he raise his hand and ask permission from the judge. A Bathroom Break is Allowed during the Trial The answer is yes; a juror or jurors can raise their hands and request a bathroom break from the judge. The judge will honor such a request, stop the trial, allow everybody to take a break, and get back after some time to resume the trial. Nobody talks about this because it is not on anyone's mind, until a person would want to use the bathroom when the trial is marching forward. Can such a person simply get up quietly and walk out of the courtroom? The answer is yes, if the person is sitting in the back of the courtroom. In the back of the courtroom, you do not have to ask permission, since it is a public courtroom and a person can leave when he needs to, without disturbing the court proceedings. What if it is an attorney, who needs to use the bathroom? What happens when the lawyer is questioning a witness, and he needs to take a bathroom break? The attorney can ask the judge for a break, and depending on how the case is progressing or how much distress the attorney is obviously in, the judge might agree to provide few minutes bathroom break. Does the Judge need to Stop Trial Proceedings? Hence, anyone in the back of the courtroom can simply walk out without asking the judge's permission, while the trial proceedings are in full swing. Jurors on the other hand, have to ask specifically for permission, since the judge will have to stop the proceedings and authorize a bathroom break. None of the normal trial proceedings can go on in the absence of a juror or jurors. Each juror is supposed to listen and evaluate the case individually, and therefore cannot miss anything that happens during the trial. Therefore the judge, will obviously have to stop proceedings and resume the trial after the bathroom break. Can an Attorney Request a Bathroom Break? The same holds true for lawyers as well, even when it is the lawyer not questioning the witness, who needs the bathroom break. The judge will have to stop proceedings and resume trial when the lawyer ready to proceed. However, a judge will consider many things before allowing a bathroom break for an attorney, since this strategy could be employed to create a break purposefully. For instance, the defense witness is on the stand and he is floundering under the cross-examination of the plaintiff's lawyer. The defense lawyer might ask for a bathroom break to create an opportunity for the witness to get his thoughts organized, and be more ready when the questioning resumes. Based on this deviousness, if the judge feels something like untoward is going on, he might order the bathroom break after the questioning is over and not immediately.

You have thought of filing a personal injury case to seek compensation for the losses and harms you have suffered. However, the legal process can take time, and there will be instances when you feel that nothing is going on in your personal injury case. There can be certain reasons for this, and they are terrific to know since it can save you some stress. First Reason for Your Case's Tediousness After you have consulted an attorney about filing your personal injury case, the attorney will then have to go ahead and investigate your particular case. He will start the process of obtaining all of your medical records. This can take some time and it could take months especially if one of your hospitals or doctors is recalcitrant. Next, your lawyer will have to read all the medical records and then send them to a medical expert for review and analysis. This can also a couple of months. Hence, one of the reasons you may believe nothing is going on in your personal injury case is because nobody might be communicating with you in terms of letting you know all the things that are going on behind the scenes. Second Reason Why You may Feel Your Case is Stuck in the Mud After your lawsuit has started, and all the parties you have used have responded to your allegations, you now have to ask the court for a scheduling conference. This is where both sides will agree on a deposition date and so on. There could be a significant gap in time, again spanning many months before you are actually notified for your deposition. This is the second reason why you might believe nothing is going on in your personal injury case. A Stack of Cases After all discoveries are complete and you tell the court that your case is ready for trial, your case will be included in the bottom of the pile of a large stack of cases. Slowly, your case will climb to the top of the pile, and you will be called for a pretrial conference. However, during this period, you could feel that your case has been neglect or is being ignored since there could be so much quiet time at this stage. It could many months before your case is called up for trial once you have notified the court of your case being ready for it. Even though it may seem there is nothing going on in your case, the reality is that there is a lot going on. Your case is waiting to come up for a pretrial conference, and your attorney will be preparing you case for trial. Your lawyer will be contacting your witnesses and talking to them about what they should be expecting and what questions they will probably be asked. Your attorney will be mobilizing all the ammunition and his entire arsenal for the trial. They want to win this case as much as you do. These are the main reasons why you could believe your personal injury case has been tossed into the garbage. The waiting can be frustrating, but there is nothing you can do. You should know that time is not being wasted and your attorney is making things happen behind the scenes.

Did you know that during a pretrial conference, if one of the sides is not ready or prepared to discuss a settlement, the judge can actually dismiss the case? Why is that? What is Expected at a Pretrial Conference? A personal injury case is nearing the trial date and scheduled for pretrial conference. The judge will try to have both parties reach a settlement. He turns to the plaintiff's lawyer who represents the injured victim and asks what he needs to settle the case. The lawyer will quote a settlement amount, and then the judge will ask the defense what they are prepared to offer in this case. If the defense lawyer says that this is the first time he is hearing about any settlement demands from the plaintiff, and he is not prepared to have any settlement discussions whatsoever – this could infuriate the judge. In fact, the judge could even dismiss the case. When the attorneys arrive in court for the purposes of a pretrial conference, the entire purpose is to try to invoke settlement negotiations. The judge will see if the defense has evaluated the case, whether they have a position and whether they are willing to talk or not. Only then will the judge make an intelligent decision about whether to adjourn the matter to facilitate further discussions or to set the case down for trial. If the defense attorney does not have any information and has not reviewed the case in terms of holding settlement discussions, then he is obstructing the judge and wasting the court's time. The judge will reprimand the defense lawyer and tell him he was supposed to come prepared and have an idea about settling the case. The Judge has the Authority to Dismiss the Case Apart from this, one of the other things available to the judge is that he can literally dismiss the defense's answer, or he can dismiss their claim. This would mean the plaintiff would have won by default. However, does this actually happen? Well, it is very rare, but it has happened, and it is within the judge's discretion to dismiss the case if the defense is not prepared or does not want to negotiate. What happens if the plaintiff's side is not prepared or willing to negotiate? The judge will be equally angry, and one of the options available to him would be to dismiss the victim's claim and his case. This would mean the defense has won, and the victim will not have a chance to obtain any compensation for their claims. The victim will then have to go through the appeals process, which is time consuming and complicated. They would also be quite upset with their attorney as well and could possibly be grounds for a legal malpractice suit depending on what happens. This almost never happens though. But it has before. Not Prepared All these legal issues arise all because one side or the other was not prepared to go ahead with the settlement discussions, when the whole purpose of the pretrial conference was to see if the case can be settled through negotiations. Avoiding a trial is worth pursuing.

Suppose you have filed a medical malpractice case, an accident case, or even a wrongful death case, and you have chosen voluntarily to settle this case before it goes to verdict. If you agree on an amount of money to settle the case for, the defense will ask for a stipulation of discontinuance. What is that? What is a Stipulation of Discontinuance and Why is it Required? It is simply a piece of paper that mainly says that I (name of the plaintiff) agree to discontinue this lawsuit. Why is stipulation of discontinuance required? It is required to finalize a particular lawsuit. Suppose you have filed a personal injury case, and after negotiations, you agree to a settlement amount, you will have to sign stipulation of discontinuance and send it over to the defense attorney who will sign it as well. Then the defense attorney will take this document and file it with the court. This way the court will have actual proof that the plaintiff has discontinued the case, and the case is over. All the necessary people involved in the case have signed off on it, telling the court that the case is now officially over and the court can now close the case and move on with other business, i.e. other cases. The Court needs Proof of the Case being Closed If the court does not have the stipulation of discontinuance, or if only one or two people involved in the lawsuit actually participated in signing it, the court would still keep the case open. The court will keep the case open, schedule conferences, and will want to know what is happening with the case. However, when everyone participates and signs off on this discontinuance document that says the case is over, then only the court will close that case file, and nobody can reopen that case after that. Make Sure You are Satisfied with the Settlement Offer before Signing Anything Therefore, if you have filed a personal injury case and negotiations are going on, you should only sign the stipulation of discontinuance, when you are fully satisfied with the settlement offer. Once you have signed this document and it is filed with the court, you cannot reopen this case for whatever reason. In fact, your signature on this document indicates that you have accepted a settlement offer voluntarily and therefore you do not wish to take the case further through trial. You have officially declared your case to be over, and that you are not going to pursue it any further. Additionally, the court will also have a document showing the case was closed. The court cannot discontinue a case without proper documentation, without all parties of the case agreeing that the case is over. The stipulation of discontinuance is signed by the plaintiff stating the case is now over, and the defense also signs it before filing it with the court.

In personal injury cases, whether it is a medical malpractice case, accident case, or even a wrongful death case, one of the attorneys might request the judge that they would like to have a sidebar. This usually happens when one of the attorneys is objecting to something. One of the attorneys will then ask the judge whether he can have a sidebar. What is a Request for a Sidebar? Sidebar means the attorneys want to speak to the judge in private. In such instances, the judge can do a number of things. He can tell the jury that he is now going to speak to the attorneys in private, and he might instruct the jury to go into the jury room and wait there until his discussion with the attorneys is over. The judge also has another alternative, where he can have the attorneys approach the bench or to the side, and speak to them quietly, so that the jury cannot hear whatever is spoken. The judge can also take the attorneys into their office to work things out as well. Anytime there is an objection from the lawyers, the judge will have to make an immediate decision about whether to allow the question or to allow the evidence to come in. However, making the decision, the judge might want to hear legal arguments from the attorneys at their request. Since the discussion involves legal arguments, the judge might not want the jury to listen to the conversation that is taking place. The Judge is the Ruler of the Law The judge is responsible for making legal decisions and legal rulings in the conducting of the case. The jury does not play any part in this. The function of the jury in a personal injury case, is to determine, who is more likely right than wrong. The jurors are finders of facts, and the judge on the other hand is the ruler of law in a courtroom. Hence, when one of the attorneys requests a sidebar, the judge will usually say yes. The attorneys will then approach the bench and speak to the judge quietly, so that the jury does not hear the conversation. This conversation is also no longer on record. The court reporter present in the courtroom will not be taking down all the things that are being said between the judge and the two attorneys. Contrast this to the questions and answers that are going on in the courtroom before the request for sidebar, where everything was being taken down by the court reporter. If there is not a court reporter – someone may just temporarily turn off the recording device. Both Lawyers are Involved Therefore, sidebar is a private conversation between the judge and both the attorneys. The request for a sidebar will be made by one of the attorneys, but both attorneys will approach the bench. The other attorney is also included in the discussion, as he also will want to hear what is going on and he might want to make legal arguments against what the other attorney is telling the judge. The judge will listen to both attorneys, and will reach a decision before calling off the sidebar so they can proceed with the trial.

Raising the Objection In a personal injury lawsuit such as a medical malpractice case, an accident case, or even a wrongful death case the defense attorney can jump up during the trial, yell out an objection, and provide the reason that question assumes facts not in evidence. The defense lawyer does not like the way the question was asked of a particular witness by the plaintiff's lawyer. By raising this objection, the defense is trying to say that the question is hypothetical and it assumes certain facts to be true. The witness is being asked to agree or disagree with a statement that is based on certain facts. The defense does not like the facts that are being raised by the plaintiff's attorney because they are not in evidence. The other Attorney will be Given a Chance to Explain In instances where the defense raises such an objection, the judge will usually give the plaintiff's lawyer the opportunity to explain why he believes those facts are in evidence, or they may be coming into evidence through another witness's testimony, or those facts might have come in through pre-trial testimony that will be entered into evidence later on. In many instances, the judge will allow the witness to answer the question based upon the hypothetical question asked by the attorney. Additionally, in all likelihood the judge will also give the jury certain instructions. For instance, the judge will say, "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you have heard a hypothetical question, which means the attorney is asking the witness to assume certain facts to be true. If you find that those facts are true, then you are permitted to give that witness's testimony whatever weight you believe it deserves. However, if you find those facts to be untrue, then obviously you are permitted to disregard that witness's testimony". A Valid Objection The objection of question assumes facts not in evidence is a valid one, and can be raised by either attorney, when he is asking hypothetical questions to a witness based upon certain facts that have not yet been presented as evidence in the trial. There could be different reasons for these facts not to be in evidence, and judge will give the attorney the opportunity to explain the reason in order to counter the objection. If the lawyer says that such facts will be presented as evidence later during the course of the trial, then the judge might allow such a line of questioning. However, the judge will still instruct the jury about the matter, and tell them to disregard the witness's testimony in case these facts are not presented into evidence later. The judge might also sustain the objection of question assumes facts into evidence, if he feels that such facts are not going to be presented, or such facts are going to be disallowed to be presented as evidence later during the trial. Therefore, this objection might be sustained or overruled, and it will mainly depend on the explanation given by the attorney.

What is Authorization? Authorization is merely a piece of paper that gives somebody permission to get copies of your medical records. If you are contemplating filing a personal injury lawsuit such as a medical malpractice case or an accident case, it is pivotal to know and to comprehend this information. When you approach an attorney to file a personal injury case, your attorney will need to obtain copies of your medical records. The only way your doctor or the hospital is going to release your records is when they have a special permission slip from you known as an authorization, which allows them to do that Why are Medical Records Important in a Personal Injury Case? Your medical records are the only evidence available to prove in court that you have suffered physical injuries and harm. There is no other way you can present your injuries to the court. Secondly, by the time your case comes to trial, you would have already received treatment for your injuries and you might have recovered. However, your medical records will contain the correct information about the injuries you had suffered after the incident and the ordeal that you went through. Your whole personal injury case is based on making a claim of compensation for your injuries, and therefore it is critical to prove what type of injuries you have suffered, the severity of your injuries and the treatment that is required now and in the future. All this information can be shown in court through your medical records. Why do You need to Give Authorization to the Defense? Assuming that your attorney has determined after reviewing your records that you have a valid basis for a case there are certain actions that have to be taken. The main one is after your lawsuit has started, the lawyers who represent the people whom you have sued will also be entitled to obtain copies of your medical records as well. They will be authorized to see that information – your medical records. Many clients ask why they have to provide authorization or permission slips to the defense. The reason is that when you submit a personal injury lawsuit seeking compensation for your injuries, you are basically claiming that somebody did something wrong and because of that you suffered from a physical injury, harm, and a disability. The defense lawyers are entitled to receive copies of your medical records to evaluate for themselves whether your claims have any merit. The Defense will want Copies of Your Records Directly from the Source The defense will often not rely on the copies of your medical records that your lawyer has obtained on your behalf. Based on this understanding, they will ask for and you will be required to grant them authorization or a permission slip, so that they can go directly to your doctors and request copies directly from the source. At that point, the defense will have the opportunity to evaluate your medical records properly and to their satisfaction. Therefore, an authorization is critical, and it is required you provide it in the course of a personal injury lawsuit in New York. If you seem hesitant to do this, the defense is going to smell blood in the water.

What is the Value of Your Case? How do you know, whether your personal injury case is worth $85,000 or $145,000 or even more? Who decides what your case is worth? Many times when an injured victim goes to a lawyer, he not only wants to know what his case is worth but also wants to know who decides what his case is worth. Well, in a medical malpractice case, accident case, or a wrongful death case, what winds up happening is that as your case proceeds through the litigation process, the lawyers will have an idea and opportunity to understand the true extent of your disabilities or the severity of your injuries. On the other hand, in a wrongful death case, the lawyer will try to find out economic losses such as lost income, and non-economic losses such as pain and suffering up until the time of death. Lawyers Try to Determine the Value of your Case Based on this information, the bottom line is that your lawyer will try to determine the complete value of your case, and so will the defense lawyer. In most personal injury cases, the insurance company will also be involved in determining the worth of your case along with the defense. When the parties involved cannot reach a settlement during the litigation process then ultimately the jury will decide the true value of your case. Some people believe that the trial judge will make a recommendation to the jury about what the value of your case is. However, this is a fallacy. The judge cannot make a recommendation because he or she is supposed to be impartial, and is not supposed to care about who wins the case. Therefore, the judge is certainly not going to tell the jury what the value of your case is. It is only for the jury to decide. At the end of the case, your lawyer will certainly explain to the jury, why he believes your case is of a particular value. Your lawyer will go through the different elements germane to the damages and ask the jury to award you a specific amount of money to compensate you for your injuries. The jury is free to award, what you ask for, or less, or more than what you have asked for. On the other hand, the defense will relay to the jury that you are not entitled to anything, and even if you are, the amount should much less than what your side is asking for. Jury Decides Ultimately Therefore, ultimately the value of your case is decided by the jury. The defense will try to ameliorate this amount down as far as possible. And if they do not like what the jury has awarded you, or what the trial judge has done with the jury's decision, then they can appeal the final verdict. So do not celebrate too quickly or too loudly if you receive what you have been asking for!

Defense Wants to Negotiate You have filed a personal injury case to claim damages for the harms and losses you have suffered because of your injuries. Now the defense wants to negotiate and they ask what the bottom line number is in this case. You and your lawyer, provide a bottom line number, but what happens if the defense comes with a much less or slightly less counteroffer? It could be an accident, medical malpractice, or even a wrongful death case, the defense will want to start negotiating, and will ask you for your bottom line dollar amount. This means the least amount that you are willing to accept for compensation. However, after you tell the defense what your bottom line figure is, and they come back with an offer that is less than what you have asked, what options do you have? What is Your Bottom Line Number? For instance, suppose you tell the defense your bottom line number is $110,000, and they come back and say they are willing to offer you $95,000. What happens then? Your original demand might have been $200,000, but now you have told them your bottom line number is $110,000, and they are offering $15,000 less just to see your reaction or perhaps they do not have too much respect for your acuity. Do you take it or not? Well, you have a number of doors you could possibly open at this point. When you have told them your bottom line number, it technically means you will not accept anything less than that amount. However, the defense is offering something that is only slightly less. There are victims, who stand on principle and say they are not willing to accept anything less that their bottom line number, and they will fight tooth and nail to get that number. An Ostentatious Strategy Asking for the lowest monetary denominator is in fact a strategy by the defense and insurance companies to try and low ball you every time. They ask for your bottom line number and then they will come with an offer than does not reach but approaches the number you have told them. There are defense attorneys who are straightforward, and they will come back only if they have permission from the insurance company to pay you your lowest dollar figure. However, most defense attorneys will come back, offer a lesser amount, and say that it was the best they could do under the circumstances. If the defense has made such a counteroffer, your lawyer is obligated to tell you this figure, and discuss the risks associated with turning down such a significant offer. One of the key risks is that is it worthwhile to fight over $15,000, and take the case to trial? It might be, but then again it might not. Additionally, there is also the chance of the jury ruling in favor of the defense, and you may end up with nothing after many months have passed and possibly a year’s worth of time.