The Way Lawyers May Rebut A Driver’s Phony Version Of The Accident

The Way Lawyers May Rebut A Driver’s Phony Version Of The Accident


J. Hernandez

Accidents happen. That is also true for accidents involving motor vehicles and pedestrians. Lawyers skilled in taking on pedestrian injury claims are adept at understanding not only the technical factors of the accident, the insurance issues, and the medical aspects of the injuries to the pedestrian, but also the psychology of the people involved. Attorneys know that individuals on occasion recollect events in keeping with their own self-image, an image of an individual who is a cautious driver, of a person not capable of causing harm to another person. It is up to the lawyer who reviews the case for the hurt person to determine what evidence, exists to disprove the version of the accident recounted by the would-be defendant.

In this accident a 75 year old male pedestrian was hit while going across the street to get back to his double-parked car. As per the pedestrian he was going across the street in the middle of the block. According to the defendant the pedestrian suddenly came out from among two parked vehicles and actually ran into the side of the van. The victim suffered several fractures like fractures to his shoulder, collarbone and to his ankle for which he needed surgery that consisted of the insertion of screws and a metal plate. The seventy five year old man had been an active person before being injured. He was even employed as a messenger. After the accident his lifestyle changed considerably.


The law firm that represented the pedestrian asked that the defense produce evidence of the damage to the side of the van professed by the driver. No such evidence was ever supplied by the defendant. The sole damage that was noted was a cracked windshield – consistent with the front of the van hitting the pedestrian and inconsistent with the pedestrian hitting the side of the van. Yet, the defendant s insurance company refused to settle the case. The law firm helping the pedestrian documented that it went forward to trial where it achieved a $475,000 verdict for the pedestrian.

The above demonstrates how much defendants will stay away from responsibility for an accident, even when they have sufficient insurance to cover them. From time to time they simply view the facts from a viewpoint that clears them of fault. At times they recall the accident in a different way from how it really happened. Sometimes they just plain lie.

Of course, there are times when the claims adjuster for the driver s insurance company accepts their insured’s version despite being confronted with a clear demonstration of liability of the part of the driver. When this occurs there is frequently little choice but to take the case to trial.

In these cases it is generally possible to determine if there is a need to retain an accident reconstruction expert. There are times when the use of an expert is absolutely essential but experience should help the attorney in deciding when to use that expert. For many situations it is advisable to not underestimate the jury. Juries are usually very smart and have good common sense. Present the evidence to them in a way that helps them connect it to their own experience and they will cut through the driver s version.

Joseph Hernandez is an Attorney accepting catastrophic injury cases. To learn more about how a

pedestrian accident lawyer

attorney can help you and about other vehicle accident cases including

fatal car accident

visit the websites

Article Source: