Anyone who survives a big rig crash should count themselves as lucky. While these trucks and the people who drive them constitute an important part of modern society, they also have very real responsibilities related to their trade. When they don't live up to them, the result is quite often death and disaster. These trucks can weigh over 100,000 pounds, in some cases, and when they're cruising down the highway at 70 miles per hour there is little that stands a realistic chance of surviving a wreck. If you do make it out, you may be eligible for damages.
Semi truck can be very safe vehicles if they're properly-maintained and deadlier than anything else on the road if they're not. Trucking companies have a responsibility to keep their trucks in good repair and to meet a host of safety standards set up by the federal and state governments. In some cases, the company may have been slack in living up to these standards and, when that is the case, they are likely financially liable for all the damage that they cause to you, whether it's to your property or to your person. A lawyer will know for sure.
If you have been hurt in a BIG RIG truck accident give us a call at the Burnett Law Firm 800.501.2091
______
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
What is a Contingency Arrangement?
There are recourses available if you’ve had a car accident. While legal affairs are usually quite expensive, there are ways you can file a claim without being put out for a lot of money. In fact, you can actually file a claim for an accident without paying money up front. This is done through a contingency arrangement, which is a good way to make sure that the case you’re filing is worthwhile. In this arrangement, the lawyer doesn’t get paid unless you go to court or win, or unless you get a settlement.
In a contingency arrangement, the vehicle accident lawyer usually offers a free consultation. At this time, they’ll sit down with you and go over the details of your case. They’ll need to know as much as you can offer; be sure to bring all the relevant paperwork with you. The attorney will be able to tell you if your case has a good chance of winning. If it does, you’ll have to work with the attorney to come up with a concrete figure to seek for damages. This is a basic part of how this type of law works. Sometimes it’s hard to put a dollar value on some kinds of injuries, but this is where the attorney’s prior experience comes in.
The Burnett Law frim has been helping people, famiy, and loved ones with personal injury cases and much more. The experence here is personal and rewarding. Take a look at our site and understand your attorneys views and success rates. Here at the Burnett Law Firm we work on a contingency attangement. This puts you at ease and us to work for you. Take a look at:
http://www.BurtBurnett.com
__________
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
In a contingency arrangement, the vehicle accident lawyer usually offers a free consultation. At this time, they’ll sit down with you and go over the details of your case. They’ll need to know as much as you can offer; be sure to bring all the relevant paperwork with you. The attorney will be able to tell you if your case has a good chance of winning. If it does, you’ll have to work with the attorney to come up with a concrete figure to seek for damages. This is a basic part of how this type of law works. Sometimes it’s hard to put a dollar value on some kinds of injuries, but this is where the attorney’s prior experience comes in.
The Burnett Law frim has been helping people, famiy, and loved ones with personal injury cases and much more. The experence here is personal and rewarding. Take a look at our site and understand your attorneys views and success rates. Here at the Burnett Law Firm we work on a contingency attangement. This puts you at ease and us to work for you. Take a look at:
http://www.BurtBurnett.com
__________
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Fact Finding and Discovery
A hallmark of the American legal system is the principle that there should be as few surprises as possible in the course of a lawsuit. Since the late 1940's, the federal court system has required disclosure of all relevant facts and documents to the other side prior to trial, and virtually every state has followed its lead. That disclosure is accomplished through a methodical process called "discovery." Discovery takes three basic forms: written discovery, document production and depositions.
Written Discovery: Interrogatories and Requests for Admission
Interrogatories are questions requiring your version of the facts and of your claims. They can be pre-printed "form" interrogatories, or specific questions asked just for your case called "special" interrogatories. Questions can range from the broad ("What happened on April 26, 2004?") to the specific ("Is it your position that the defendant was wearing sunglasses at 2:30 p.m. on April 26, 2004?"). If the questions asked are not fair questions or are difficult to understand, your attorney will help you decide what you should object to.
Requests for admission are not often used, but can be a very powerful tool. They ask a party to admit or deny certain facts pertaining to the case, and they carry with them penalties for not answering, for answering falsely, or even answering late.
Document Production
Document production is fairly self-explanatory. Any party has a right to see most documents that even arguably relate to a case. Particularly in more complex medical malpractice or product defect cases, the documents involved can be voluminous. Increasingly, courts are allowing access to computer files as part of document discovery. In cases where enough is at stake to justify it, courts have even allowed litigants to reconstruct deleted files (like e-mail), although that practice has not yet become common.
Depositions
Depositions are sworn statements, when a person will answer questions from an attorney, and a court reporter will make a transcript of all that is said. Depositions can range in length from an hour to a week or more. Although all attorneys have their own strategies for depositions, there are basically three reasons to do them: to lock people into their stories, to see what the other side has, and to do a "practice trial," that is, to see how a witness will appear and conduct themselves before a judge or jury.
Your attorney will tell you what he or she wants from you if you are deposed, but there are two general things to remember. First, never guess. The purpose of a deposition is to give facts, not to speculate as to what might have happened. Even if it makes you self-conscious to say it, sometimes "I don't know" is the right answer. Second, it is human nature to want to explain things so that your listener understands, but you should resist the impulse. It is your opponent's job to get the answers. It is your job to answer only the question asked, not to offer additional information.
Things to Remember About Discovery
Keep in mind that it is very likely that anything and everything will come out at some point in the discovery process.
It is imperative that you be honest with your attorney about the facts and documents that may come out. He or she can't do the best job if you don't disclose everything.
Discovery can be lengthy, expensive, intrusive, and frustrating. Whether you want to have your life opened to that kind of scrutiny should play a role in your decision whether or not to start a lawsuit.
Be honest. Nothing will make you lose a case quicker than lying in discovery and getting caught, and it is likely that you will get caught if you are purposefully dishonest.
___The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Written Discovery: Interrogatories and Requests for Admission
Interrogatories are questions requiring your version of the facts and of your claims. They can be pre-printed "form" interrogatories, or specific questions asked just for your case called "special" interrogatories. Questions can range from the broad ("What happened on April 26, 2004?") to the specific ("Is it your position that the defendant was wearing sunglasses at 2:30 p.m. on April 26, 2004?"). If the questions asked are not fair questions or are difficult to understand, your attorney will help you decide what you should object to.
Requests for admission are not often used, but can be a very powerful tool. They ask a party to admit or deny certain facts pertaining to the case, and they carry with them penalties for not answering, for answering falsely, or even answering late.
Document Production
Document production is fairly self-explanatory. Any party has a right to see most documents that even arguably relate to a case. Particularly in more complex medical malpractice or product defect cases, the documents involved can be voluminous. Increasingly, courts are allowing access to computer files as part of document discovery. In cases where enough is at stake to justify it, courts have even allowed litigants to reconstruct deleted files (like e-mail), although that practice has not yet become common.
Depositions
Depositions are sworn statements, when a person will answer questions from an attorney, and a court reporter will make a transcript of all that is said. Depositions can range in length from an hour to a week or more. Although all attorneys have their own strategies for depositions, there are basically three reasons to do them: to lock people into their stories, to see what the other side has, and to do a "practice trial," that is, to see how a witness will appear and conduct themselves before a judge or jury.
Your attorney will tell you what he or she wants from you if you are deposed, but there are two general things to remember. First, never guess. The purpose of a deposition is to give facts, not to speculate as to what might have happened. Even if it makes you self-conscious to say it, sometimes "I don't know" is the right answer. Second, it is human nature to want to explain things so that your listener understands, but you should resist the impulse. It is your opponent's job to get the answers. It is your job to answer only the question asked, not to offer additional information.
Things to Remember About Discovery
Keep in mind that it is very likely that anything and everything will come out at some point in the discovery process.
It is imperative that you be honest with your attorney about the facts and documents that may come out. He or she can't do the best job if you don't disclose everything.
Discovery can be lengthy, expensive, intrusive, and frustrating. Whether you want to have your life opened to that kind of scrutiny should play a role in your decision whether or not to start a lawsuit.
Be honest. Nothing will make you lose a case quicker than lying in discovery and getting caught, and it is likely that you will get caught if you are purposefully dishonest.
___The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Resolving Your Case before Trial: Court Motions
Pretrial motions can resolve many important questions about your lawsuit. A motion is a request your lawyer files with the court asking for a ruling on a particular matter. If the ruling on the motion could terminate the litigation and end the dispute before trial, it is called a dispositive motion. If the ruling is on some incidental question that arises during the litigation, it is a nondispositive motion. The information below is intended to give you a basic idea of dispositive motions that might end your case before trial, and how those motions work.
Motion to Dismiss
A motion to dismiss is sometimes filed in the very early stages of the litigation, before the parties have conducted discovery. The material presented in the complaint and any exhibits to the complaint are the focus of the motion. The motion is brought when the defendant believes that the complaint is legally deficient in some way. In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court must view the facts set forth in the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. The motion to dismiss is usually based on one or more of the following legal deficiencies:
Lack of subject matter jurisdiction, meaning that the court doesn't have the power to rule on the controversy. For example, state law may require a special court to determine certain matters, such as requiring that a probate court, rather than a general civil court, decide a complaint involving the interpretation of a will.
Lack of personal jurisdiction. This means that the court does not have power to make decisions affecting the defendant personally. The court lacks jurisdiction over you if you do not have sufficient minimum contacts with the place where the lawsuit has been filed. For example, if you were involved in an automobile accident at Yellowstone National Park, but you live in Florida and you're being sued in Vermont, you would have a good reason to argue that the Vermont court doesn't have jurisdiction over you.
Improper venue. "Venue" refers to the particular location of the court. States have statutes setting forth the places within the state where you can be sued. If you are not sued in one of those places, the site of the lawsuit is inappropriate. A venue may be legally improper even if the court has personal jurisdiction over you. A frequent solution to this problem is not to dismiss the case, but to order that it be transferred to the proper venue.
Insufficiency of process or insufficient service of process. A case may be dismissed if there is a technical defect in the summons (which is rare), or if you were not properly served with the summons and complaint (which is more common). Service may be improper for a number of reasons, so be sure to tell your lawyer about how you were served and any odd circumstances so your lawyer can determine whether it could lead to the case being dismissed.
Failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In some cases, your lawyer may conclude that the facts set forth in the complaint do not state a legal claim for relief. For example, the complaint may allege that you did some negligent act that injured the plaintiff. The law may provide that you don't have any responsibility to look out for the plaintiff under the circumstances described in the complaint. If you don't have a legal responsibility, you cannot be held liable for the plaintiff's injuries.
Summary Judgment Motion
In some cases, the key facts are not disputed and require that judgment be entered for one of the parties. This is known as a summary judgment, in that it summarily ends the case before trial. The purpose of a trial is to have somebody -- the judge or the jury -- decide what the facts are. If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial. Instead the party who believes that the undisputed facts compel a ruling in his or her favor will file a motion for summary judgment. The motion asks the court to consider the undisputed facts and apply the law to them, and argues that the law requires a judgment for the party bringing the motion.
Summary judgment is described as "a blunt instrument" that can abruptly terminate the litigation. To avoid a summary judgment, the other party must provide the court with evidence that would be permitted at trial that indicates that the key facts are disputable. If the court agrees with the party opposing the motion and finds that the key facts are in dispute, the court cannot enter judgment and must instead send the case to trial.
Motion for Default Judgment
If a defendant fails to answer the complaint or file a motion to dismiss within the time limit set forth in the summons, the defendant is in default . When a defendant is in default, the plaintiff can ask the court clerk to make a note of that fact in the file, a procedure called entry of default . Entry of default is serious: it means that because the defendant has failed to appear, he or she will not be permitted to contest whether he or she is liable to the plaintiff. Instead, the only question in dispute is how much the plaintiff should receive in damages. The court will send the defendant a notice stating that default has been entered against him or her.
If a defendant is in default, acts promptly, and has an adequate excuse, he or she may be able to convince the court to set aside or vacate (undo) the entry of default from the file. Courts very much prefer that cases be decided on the merits, which often influences them to grant a motion to vacate entry of default. But in some cases, a court will decide that the defendants reasons aren't good enough and refuse to set aside or vacate the entry of default.
If you need assistance from a Lawyer contact us at 800.501.2091 or WWW.BurtBurnett.com. All calls are free and we will be sure to direct you in the right direction to help you in your accident.
__
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Motion to Dismiss
A motion to dismiss is sometimes filed in the very early stages of the litigation, before the parties have conducted discovery. The material presented in the complaint and any exhibits to the complaint are the focus of the motion. The motion is brought when the defendant believes that the complaint is legally deficient in some way. In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court must view the facts set forth in the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. The motion to dismiss is usually based on one or more of the following legal deficiencies:
Lack of subject matter jurisdiction, meaning that the court doesn't have the power to rule on the controversy. For example, state law may require a special court to determine certain matters, such as requiring that a probate court, rather than a general civil court, decide a complaint involving the interpretation of a will.
Lack of personal jurisdiction. This means that the court does not have power to make decisions affecting the defendant personally. The court lacks jurisdiction over you if you do not have sufficient minimum contacts with the place where the lawsuit has been filed. For example, if you were involved in an automobile accident at Yellowstone National Park, but you live in Florida and you're being sued in Vermont, you would have a good reason to argue that the Vermont court doesn't have jurisdiction over you.
Improper venue. "Venue" refers to the particular location of the court. States have statutes setting forth the places within the state where you can be sued. If you are not sued in one of those places, the site of the lawsuit is inappropriate. A venue may be legally improper even if the court has personal jurisdiction over you. A frequent solution to this problem is not to dismiss the case, but to order that it be transferred to the proper venue.
Insufficiency of process or insufficient service of process. A case may be dismissed if there is a technical defect in the summons (which is rare), or if you were not properly served with the summons and complaint (which is more common). Service may be improper for a number of reasons, so be sure to tell your lawyer about how you were served and any odd circumstances so your lawyer can determine whether it could lead to the case being dismissed.
Failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In some cases, your lawyer may conclude that the facts set forth in the complaint do not state a legal claim for relief. For example, the complaint may allege that you did some negligent act that injured the plaintiff. The law may provide that you don't have any responsibility to look out for the plaintiff under the circumstances described in the complaint. If you don't have a legal responsibility, you cannot be held liable for the plaintiff's injuries.
Summary Judgment Motion
In some cases, the key facts are not disputed and require that judgment be entered for one of the parties. This is known as a summary judgment, in that it summarily ends the case before trial. The purpose of a trial is to have somebody -- the judge or the jury -- decide what the facts are. If the facts are not in dispute, there is no need for a trial. Instead the party who believes that the undisputed facts compel a ruling in his or her favor will file a motion for summary judgment. The motion asks the court to consider the undisputed facts and apply the law to them, and argues that the law requires a judgment for the party bringing the motion.
Summary judgment is described as "a blunt instrument" that can abruptly terminate the litigation. To avoid a summary judgment, the other party must provide the court with evidence that would be permitted at trial that indicates that the key facts are disputable. If the court agrees with the party opposing the motion and finds that the key facts are in dispute, the court cannot enter judgment and must instead send the case to trial.
Motion for Default Judgment
If a defendant fails to answer the complaint or file a motion to dismiss within the time limit set forth in the summons, the defendant is in default . When a defendant is in default, the plaintiff can ask the court clerk to make a note of that fact in the file, a procedure called entry of default . Entry of default is serious: it means that because the defendant has failed to appear, he or she will not be permitted to contest whether he or she is liable to the plaintiff. Instead, the only question in dispute is how much the plaintiff should receive in damages. The court will send the defendant a notice stating that default has been entered against him or her.
If a defendant is in default, acts promptly, and has an adequate excuse, he or she may be able to convince the court to set aside or vacate (undo) the entry of default from the file. Courts very much prefer that cases be decided on the merits, which often influences them to grant a motion to vacate entry of default. But in some cases, a court will decide that the defendants reasons aren't good enough and refuse to set aside or vacate the entry of default.
If you need assistance from a Lawyer contact us at 800.501.2091 or WWW.BurtBurnett.com. All calls are free and we will be sure to direct you in the right direction to help you in your accident.
__
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Resolution Before Trial: Settlement
The majority of legal claims arising from accidents or injuries do not reach a civil court trial -- most are resolved earlier through a negotiated settlement among the parties. An informal settlement can even take place before any lawsuit is filed. Through settlement, the plaintiff in a personal injury case agrees to give up the right to pursue any further legal action in connection with the accident or injury, in exchange for the payment of an agreed-upon sum of money from the defendant or an insurance company. In rare cases, instead of paying money the defendant will agree to perform (or cease performing) a certain action.
If you are considering settling a legal claim after an accident or injury, or if you have received a settlement offer, you should talk to your attorney and receive his or her thorough assessment of the case and the prospects for settlement. Consider the following points:
Amount he or she thinks the case is worth in a range of dollar amounts.
Verdicts and settlements in similar cases.
Chances of winning at trial.
Unfavorable publicity for either side (civil court trials are open to the public and media scrutiny).
Amount of personal information that could be revealed at trial or through further discovery.
Possible disclosure of business information or trade secrets.
When the case is likely to be called for trial.
Practical difficulties in trying the case.
Weaknesses in your evidence.
Weaknesses in your opponent's evidence.
The amount of the defendant's insurance coverage.
The defendant's own monetary resources.
The defendant's lawyer's negotiation tactics (your lawyer may have negotiated with the lawyer before, or has talked to other lawyers to get an idea of what to expect).
The extent to which your opponent is likely to play "hardball."
If you are the plaintiff, ask how much of the settlement proceeds will be applied to your lawyer's fee and your expenses.
If you are the plaintiff, ask how the settlement payments will affect your federal and state income taxes.
Talk about what you're willing to concede in order to get the case settled.
Discuss the minimum amount you will accept.
Consider the possibility of a partial settlement, that is, settling the easy issues first while you continue to negotiate the more contentious issues.
If you are the plaintiff, consider accepting a remedy other than money.
---
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
If you are considering settling a legal claim after an accident or injury, or if you have received a settlement offer, you should talk to your attorney and receive his or her thorough assessment of the case and the prospects for settlement. Consider the following points:
Amount he or she thinks the case is worth in a range of dollar amounts.
Verdicts and settlements in similar cases.
Chances of winning at trial.
Unfavorable publicity for either side (civil court trials are open to the public and media scrutiny).
Amount of personal information that could be revealed at trial or through further discovery.
Possible disclosure of business information or trade secrets.
When the case is likely to be called for trial.
Practical difficulties in trying the case.
Weaknesses in your evidence.
Weaknesses in your opponent's evidence.
The amount of the defendant's insurance coverage.
The defendant's own monetary resources.
The defendant's lawyer's negotiation tactics (your lawyer may have negotiated with the lawyer before, or has talked to other lawyers to get an idea of what to expect).
The extent to which your opponent is likely to play "hardball."
If you are the plaintiff, ask how much of the settlement proceeds will be applied to your lawyer's fee and your expenses.
If you are the plaintiff, ask how the settlement payments will affect your federal and state income taxes.
Talk about what you're willing to concede in order to get the case settled.
Discuss the minimum amount you will accept.
Consider the possibility of a partial settlement, that is, settling the easy issues first while you continue to negotiate the more contentious issues.
If you are the plaintiff, consider accepting a remedy other than money.
---
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
Monday, August 2, 2010
What Happens At Trial
In a personal injury trial, a judge or jury examines the evidence to decide whether, by a "preponderance of the evidence," the defendant should be held legally responsible for the injuries and harm alleged by the plaintiff. A trial is the plaintiff's opportunity to argue his or her case, in the hope of obtaining a judgment against the defendant. A trial also represents the defendant's chance to refute the plaintiff's case, and to offer his or her own evidence related to the dispute at issue. After both sides have presented their arguments, the judge or jury considers whether to find the defendant liable for the plaintiff's claimed injuries, and if so, to what extent (i.e. the amount of money damages a defendant must pay).
(Note: Although a trial is the most high-profile phase of the personal injury lawsuit process, the vast majority of personal injury disputes are resolved well before trial -- and in some cases before a lawsuit is even filed -- via settlement between the parties, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes like arbitration and mediation, or through dismissal of the case.)
A complete personal injury trial typically consists of six main phases, each of which is described in more detail below:
-Choosing a Jury
-Opening Statements
-Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination
-Closing Arguments
-Jury Instruction
-Jury Deliberation and Verdict
-Choosing a Jury
Except in cases that are tried only before a judge, one of the first steps in any personal injury trial is selection of a jury. During jury selection, the judge (and usually the plaintiff and the defendant through their respective attorneys) will question a pool of potential jurors generally and as to matters pertaining to the particular case -- including personal ideological predispositions or life experiences that may pertain to the case. The judge can excuse potential jurors at this stage, based on their responses to questioning.
Also at this stage, both the plaintiff and the defendant may exclude a certain number of jurors through use of "peremptory challenges" and challenges "for cause." A peremptory challenge can be used to exclude a juror for any reason (even gender and ethnicity in civil cases), and a challenge for cause can be used to exclude a juror who has shown that he or she cannot be truly objective in deciding the case.
Opening Statements
Once a jury is selected, the first "dialogue" in a personal injury trial comes in the form of two opening statements -- one from the plaintiff's attorney, and the other from an attorney representing the defendant. No witnesses testify at this stage, and no physical evidence is ordinarily utilized.
Because the plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant's legal liability for the plaintiff's injuries, the plaintiff's opening statement is usually given first, and is often more detailed than that of the defendant. In some cases, the defendant may wait until the conclusion of the plaintiff's main case before making its own opening statement.
Regardless of when opening statements are made by either side in a personal injury case, during those statements:
The plaintiff presents the facts of the accident or injury and the defendant's alleged role in causing the plaintiff's damages -- basically walking the jury through what the plaintiff intends to demonstrate in order to get a civil judgment against the defendant.
The defendant's attorney gives the jury the defense's own interpretation of the facts, and sets the stage for rebutting the plaintiff's key evidence and presenting any "affirmative" defenses to the plaintiff's allegations.
When a personal injury lawsuit involves multiple parties (i.e. where three individual plaintiffs sue one defendant, or one plaintiff sues two separate defendants), attorneys representing each party may give their own distinct opening arguments.
Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination
At the heart of any personal injury trial is what is often called the "case-in-chief," the stage at which each side presents its key evidence and arguments to the jury.
In its case-in-chief, the plaintiff methodically sets forth its evidence in an attempt to convince the jury that the defendant is legally responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and damages. It is at this point that the plaintiff may call witnesses and experts to testify, in order to strengthen his or her case. The plaintiff may also introduce physical evidence, such as photographs, documents, and medical reports. Especially in more complicated personal injury lawsuits such as medical malpractice and defective product claims, a plaintiff's utilization of expert testimony and documentary evidence will be crucial in proving the defendant's legal responsibility for the plaintiff's damages.
Whether a witness is called by the plaintiff or the defendant, the witness testimony process usually adheres to the following formula
The witness is called to the stand and is "sworn in," taking an oath to tell the truth.
The party who called the witness to the stand questions the witness through "direct" examination, eliciting information through question-and-answer, to strengthen the party's position in the dispute.
After direct examination, the opposing party has an opportunity to question the witness through "cross-examination" -- attempting to poke holes in the witness's story, attack their credibility, or otherwise discredit the witness and his or her testimony.
After cross-examination, the side that originally called the witness has a second opportunity to question him or her, through "re-direct examination," and attempt to remedy any damaging effects of cross-examination.
After the plaintiff concludes its case-in-chief and "rests," the defendant can present its own evidence in the same proactive manner, seeking to show that it is not liable for the plaintiff's claimed harm. The defense may call its own witnesses to the stand, and can present any of its own independent evidence in an effort to refute or downplay the key elements of the plaintiff's legal allegations. Once the defense has rested, the plaintiff has an opportunity to respond to the defense's arguments through a process known as "rebuttal," a brief period during which the plaintiff may only contradict the defense's evidence (rather than present new arguments). Sometimes, the defense may in turn have a chance to respond to the prosecution's rebuttal.
Once the plaintiff and defendant each have had an opportunity to present their case and to challenge the evidence presented by the other, both sides "rest," meaning that no more evidence will be presented to the jury before closing arguments are made.
Closing Arguments
Similar to the opening statement, the closing argument offers the plaintiff and the defendant in a personal injury dispute a chance to "sum up" the case, recapping the evidence in a light favorable to their respective positions. This is the final chance for the parties to address the jury prior to deliberations, so in closing arguments the plaintiff seeks to show why the evidence requires the jury to find the defendant legally responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. In turn, the defendant tries to show that the plaintiff has fallen short of establishing the defendant's liability for any civil judgment in the plaintiff's favor.
Jury Instruction
After both sides of the case have had a chance to present their evidence and make a closing argument, the next step toward a verdict is jury instruction -- a process in which the judge gives the jury the set of legal standards it will need to decide whether the defendant should be held accountable for the plaintiff's alleged harm.
The judge decides what legal standards should apply to the defendant's case, based on the personal injury claims at issue and the evidence presented during the trial. Often, this process takes place with input and argument from both the plaintiff and the defendant. The judge then instructs the jury on those relevant legal principles decided upon, including findings the jury will need to make in order to arrive at certain conclusions. The judge also describes key concepts, such as the "preponderance of the evidence" legal standard; defines any specific injury claims or "torts" the jury may consider (i.e. fraud and infliction of emotional distress); and discusses different types of damages (i.e. compensatory and punitive) -- all based on the evidence presented at trial.
The case then goes "to the jury."
Jury Deliberation and Verdict
After receiving instruction from the judge, the jurors as a group consider the case through a process called "deliberation," attempting to agree on whether the defendant should be held liable for the plaintiff's claimed injuries, and if so, the appropriate compensation for those injuries. Deliberation is the first opportunity for the jury to discuss the case -- a methodical process that can last from a few hours to several weeks. Once the jury reaches a decision, the jury foreperson informs the judge, and the judge usually announces the verdict in open court.
Most states require that a 12-person jury in a personal injury case be unanimous in finding for the plaintiff or the defendant, though some states allow for verdicts based on a majority as low as 9 to 3. If the jury fails to reach a unanimous (or sufficient majority) verdict and finds itself at a standstill (a "hung" jury), the judge may declare a "mistrial," after which the case may be dismissed or the trial may start over again from the jury selection stage.
__
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
If you are in need of a Attorney please click here: http://www.BurtBurnett.com
(Note: Although a trial is the most high-profile phase of the personal injury lawsuit process, the vast majority of personal injury disputes are resolved well before trial -- and in some cases before a lawsuit is even filed -- via settlement between the parties, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes like arbitration and mediation, or through dismissal of the case.)
A complete personal injury trial typically consists of six main phases, each of which is described in more detail below:
-Choosing a Jury
-Opening Statements
-Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination
-Closing Arguments
-Jury Instruction
-Jury Deliberation and Verdict
-Choosing a Jury
Except in cases that are tried only before a judge, one of the first steps in any personal injury trial is selection of a jury. During jury selection, the judge (and usually the plaintiff and the defendant through their respective attorneys) will question a pool of potential jurors generally and as to matters pertaining to the particular case -- including personal ideological predispositions or life experiences that may pertain to the case. The judge can excuse potential jurors at this stage, based on their responses to questioning.
Also at this stage, both the plaintiff and the defendant may exclude a certain number of jurors through use of "peremptory challenges" and challenges "for cause." A peremptory challenge can be used to exclude a juror for any reason (even gender and ethnicity in civil cases), and a challenge for cause can be used to exclude a juror who has shown that he or she cannot be truly objective in deciding the case.
Opening Statements
Once a jury is selected, the first "dialogue" in a personal injury trial comes in the form of two opening statements -- one from the plaintiff's attorney, and the other from an attorney representing the defendant. No witnesses testify at this stage, and no physical evidence is ordinarily utilized.
Because the plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant's legal liability for the plaintiff's injuries, the plaintiff's opening statement is usually given first, and is often more detailed than that of the defendant. In some cases, the defendant may wait until the conclusion of the plaintiff's main case before making its own opening statement.
Regardless of when opening statements are made by either side in a personal injury case, during those statements:
The plaintiff presents the facts of the accident or injury and the defendant's alleged role in causing the plaintiff's damages -- basically walking the jury through what the plaintiff intends to demonstrate in order to get a civil judgment against the defendant.
The defendant's attorney gives the jury the defense's own interpretation of the facts, and sets the stage for rebutting the plaintiff's key evidence and presenting any "affirmative" defenses to the plaintiff's allegations.
When a personal injury lawsuit involves multiple parties (i.e. where three individual plaintiffs sue one defendant, or one plaintiff sues two separate defendants), attorneys representing each party may give their own distinct opening arguments.
Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination
At the heart of any personal injury trial is what is often called the "case-in-chief," the stage at which each side presents its key evidence and arguments to the jury.
In its case-in-chief, the plaintiff methodically sets forth its evidence in an attempt to convince the jury that the defendant is legally responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and damages. It is at this point that the plaintiff may call witnesses and experts to testify, in order to strengthen his or her case. The plaintiff may also introduce physical evidence, such as photographs, documents, and medical reports. Especially in more complicated personal injury lawsuits such as medical malpractice and defective product claims, a plaintiff's utilization of expert testimony and documentary evidence will be crucial in proving the defendant's legal responsibility for the plaintiff's damages.
Whether a witness is called by the plaintiff or the defendant, the witness testimony process usually adheres to the following formula
The witness is called to the stand and is "sworn in," taking an oath to tell the truth.
The party who called the witness to the stand questions the witness through "direct" examination, eliciting information through question-and-answer, to strengthen the party's position in the dispute.
After direct examination, the opposing party has an opportunity to question the witness through "cross-examination" -- attempting to poke holes in the witness's story, attack their credibility, or otherwise discredit the witness and his or her testimony.
After cross-examination, the side that originally called the witness has a second opportunity to question him or her, through "re-direct examination," and attempt to remedy any damaging effects of cross-examination.
After the plaintiff concludes its case-in-chief and "rests," the defendant can present its own evidence in the same proactive manner, seeking to show that it is not liable for the plaintiff's claimed harm. The defense may call its own witnesses to the stand, and can present any of its own independent evidence in an effort to refute or downplay the key elements of the plaintiff's legal allegations. Once the defense has rested, the plaintiff has an opportunity to respond to the defense's arguments through a process known as "rebuttal," a brief period during which the plaintiff may only contradict the defense's evidence (rather than present new arguments). Sometimes, the defense may in turn have a chance to respond to the prosecution's rebuttal.
Once the plaintiff and defendant each have had an opportunity to present their case and to challenge the evidence presented by the other, both sides "rest," meaning that no more evidence will be presented to the jury before closing arguments are made.
Closing Arguments
Similar to the opening statement, the closing argument offers the plaintiff and the defendant in a personal injury dispute a chance to "sum up" the case, recapping the evidence in a light favorable to their respective positions. This is the final chance for the parties to address the jury prior to deliberations, so in closing arguments the plaintiff seeks to show why the evidence requires the jury to find the defendant legally responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. In turn, the defendant tries to show that the plaintiff has fallen short of establishing the defendant's liability for any civil judgment in the plaintiff's favor.
Jury Instruction
After both sides of the case have had a chance to present their evidence and make a closing argument, the next step toward a verdict is jury instruction -- a process in which the judge gives the jury the set of legal standards it will need to decide whether the defendant should be held accountable for the plaintiff's alleged harm.
The judge decides what legal standards should apply to the defendant's case, based on the personal injury claims at issue and the evidence presented during the trial. Often, this process takes place with input and argument from both the plaintiff and the defendant. The judge then instructs the jury on those relevant legal principles decided upon, including findings the jury will need to make in order to arrive at certain conclusions. The judge also describes key concepts, such as the "preponderance of the evidence" legal standard; defines any specific injury claims or "torts" the jury may consider (i.e. fraud and infliction of emotional distress); and discusses different types of damages (i.e. compensatory and punitive) -- all based on the evidence presented at trial.
The case then goes "to the jury."
Jury Deliberation and Verdict
After receiving instruction from the judge, the jurors as a group consider the case through a process called "deliberation," attempting to agree on whether the defendant should be held liable for the plaintiff's claimed injuries, and if so, the appropriate compensation for those injuries. Deliberation is the first opportunity for the jury to discuss the case -- a methodical process that can last from a few hours to several weeks. Once the jury reaches a decision, the jury foreperson informs the judge, and the judge usually announces the verdict in open court.
Most states require that a 12-person jury in a personal injury case be unanimous in finding for the plaintiff or the defendant, though some states allow for verdicts based on a majority as low as 9 to 3. If the jury fails to reach a unanimous (or sufficient majority) verdict and finds itself at a standstill (a "hung" jury), the judge may declare a "mistrial," after which the case may be dismissed or the trial may start over again from the jury selection stage.
__
The stories and situations mentioned on this blog are for informational purposes only. The Burnett Law Firm does not claim to represent any party referenced in this post. This blog exists to raise public awareness of the very real dangers we face every day and to serve as a central location where information and opinions can be exchanged with regard to the way that the situations mentioned on this site are impacted by existing legal statutes.
If you are in need of a Attorney please click here: http://www.BurtBurnett.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)