Personal Injury

Published on: March 8, 2023

Basic Personal Injury Law

Personal injury law covers a wide variety of cases that involve injuries caused by another person or party. A personal injury claim is brought against someone whose negligence caused you harm. Common examples include vehicle accidents, slip and fall cases, dog bites, and medical malpractice. Personal injury laws allow victims to seek compensation for their injuries and damages. Most personal injury claims are based on the legal theory of negligence. Negligence is the failure to exercise the same level of care that a person of reasonable prudence would use in the same or similar situation. It is always best to consult with an experienced Syracuse personal injury lawyer as soon as possible to ensure your rights are protected.

Personal injury claims are numerous, there are millions of injuries every year. A personal injury claim will detail a victim’s claims against someone and the damages they are demanding. These cases often involve a lengthy legal process in addition to any recovery from injury. Many of these cases end in settlement, while others end up going to trial before a jury. Before you can recover compensation for an accident claim, you must prove each of the elements of a negligence claim:

The other party owed a duty of care to you.

Published on: June 30, 2022

Court Discusses Liability Under New York’s Scaffold Law

by Jeff DeFrancisco

Generally, people who suffer harm in the workplace cannot pursue personal injury claims against their employers and instead are limited to recovering workers’ compensation benefits. They can seek damages from other parties that may be responsible for their harm, however. Further, in some instances, the law allows for the absolute imposition of liability for harm suffered while working. This was illustrated in a recent New York case in which the court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff due to the defendant’s violation of New York’s scaffold law. If you were injured in an accident caused by another party’s negligence, you might be owed damages, and it is smart to meet with a Syracuse personal injury attorney to assess your rights.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who worked for a plumbing company, suffered injuries when he fell while installing a shower curtain rod in a bathroom. He did not have adequate room to use an A-frame ladder and instead stood on the rim of the bathtub. The bathroom did not have artificial lighting and was dim. The plaintiff struck his head on the rod and fell to the floor.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the general contractor and lessee, asserting, among other things, that there were liable under New york’s scaffold law. The court granted the motion with regard to the scaffold law claim, and the defendants appealed. Continue reading

Published on: September 26, 2021

New York Court Discusses the Assumption of the Risk Defense in Personal Injury Matters

by Jeff DeFrancisco

Horses are often thought of as gentle giants, and many people living in New York take pleasure in riding them. Even the most well-trained horses can be unpredictable, though, and there is an inherent risk in horseback riding. As such, a person that suffers harm while riding a horse may have difficulty proving that their harm is compensable. Recently, a New York court issued an opinion discussing the assumption of the risks that accompany riding horses in a case in which the defendant argued it could not be deemed responsible for the plaintiff’s harm. If you were hurt while engaging in a recreational activity, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer regarding what damages you may be owed.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

Allegedly, the plaintiff visited the defendant ranch to go on a horseback ride. Prior to the ride, she signed numerous documents, including an assumption of risk form. She subsequently embarked on two rides. On her second ride, a wrangler horse from another group became loose. The wrangler horse bumped the plaintiff’s horse and pulled the plaintiff’s reins from her hands. She held onto the saddle, but as the horse began to run, she fell, suffering a broken rib and arm and a contusion to her hip.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in which she argued that the failure to warn her of the risk of a stampede or to prevent or mitigate the stampede constituted negligence. The defendant moved for the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims through summary judgment, arguing that she assumed the risk of harm. Continue reading

Published on: April 21, 2021

Summary Judgment on Issue of Bus Driver’s Liability Was Erroneous, According to Reviewing New York Court

by Jeff DeFrancisco

Syracuse car accident cases often come down to the question of which party (or, sometimes, which eyewitness) to believe. If one party says he was rear-ended while stopped at a traffic light and this testimony is unopposed, he or she may be granted partial summary judgment; in such a situation, a trial will only be necessary if the parties disagree on the issue of damages.

However, if the opposing party or another witness claims that the accident happened when one party abruptly darted in front of the other and stopped unnecessarily, the case will probably proceed toward a jury trial on the question of fault. After all, one of the main duties of a jury member is to resolve factual inconsistencies by deciding who to believe when the parties disagree about what happened.

Facts of the Case

In a case appealed from the Supreme Court of Bronx County, the plaintiff was a man who alleged that he was injured as a result of the negligence of the defendant bus driver. He also asserted a claim against the bus driver’s employer, most likely asserting a claim of vicarious liability (although the exact details of this portion of the case was not explained in the appeal). According to the plaintiff, the accident occurred when he was stopped at an intersection and rear-ended by the bus.

Published on: March 28, 2021

New York Appellate Tribunal Reviews Reasonableness of Jury’s Award for Pain and Suffering in Car Accident Case

by Jeff DeFrancisco

In most Syracuse car accident cases that are not settled prior to trial, the amount of money damages to which an injured person is entitled is a matter to be determined by the jury. There are multiple factors to be considered in assessing the amount due, and the jury does have a fair amount of latitude in making its determination.

This is not to say, however, that the plaintiff’s fate in completely in the hands of the jury. There are certain checks on the system, including the possibility that the amount awarded by the jury may be set aside by an appellate court. When this happens, the reviewing court may issue what is called an “additur” or a “remittitur,” in which a more reasonable amount is suggested and, if the parties agree, the judgment is then modified to reflect the agreed upon amount.

If the opposing party does not agree to the suggested award, he or she has the option of appealing the matter further or having the matter returned to the trial court for a new trial.

Published on: February 21, 2021

High School Baseball Player Assumed Risk of Multiple Balls in Play at Practice, Says New York Court

by Jeff DeFrancisco

Many Syracuse personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits are brought by individuals asserting that other people have been negligent. “Negligence” simply means that someone has breached a duty of care owed to another person, thereby causing damages.

Negligence cases can also be filed against businesses and governmental entities – even school districts (both public and private). The inquiry is the same: was a duty breached, causing harm to the plaintiff? If so, the plaintiff can seek compensation for things like medical expenses, lost income, and pain and suffering.

Of course, there are some potential defenses to a negligence claim. Once such defense is that the plaintiff knew and understood the risks of a certain activity and chose to engage in it anyway. A defendant who can prove “assumption of the risk” may have a good legal argument against being held responsible for harm to a plaintiff who might otherwise be entitled to substantial financial compensation.