Cases involving neck injuries invite the introduction of a large number of legal issues.
• What would the defendant be willing to pay?
• What would the plaintiff be willing to accept?
Factors that can shape the answers to the above questions:
To what extent was the plaintiff injured? What is the nature of that injury? Would the jury be apt to rule that the defendant was, indeed, at fault for the injury-causing accident?
If the defendant felt that the other party was partly responsible for the accident, then that view would cause a reduction in the amount of money that the defendant was willing to pay the plaintiff. On the other hand, if the plaintiff’s life had been greatly altered by the need to deal with the accident-caused injury, then the plaintiff would not agree to a small settlement. (More on that aspect of the injury’s value can be found below.)
In addition to the nature of the injury, the specifics on the treatment would work to determine how much money the defendant was willing to pay, and how much money the plaintiff was willing to accept. Insurance companies normally favor one type of treatment over an alternative type.
Sometimes, a victim with a neck injury decides to get treated by a chiropractor. Insurers prefer to cover a treatment that was administered by a licensed physician. In other words, the value of a neck injury case would decrease, if the plaintiff chose to follow the recommendations of a chiropractor, as per Personal Injury Lawyer in Windsor.
As mentioned above, the injury’s effect on the plaintiff’s life would influence the nature of the plaintiff’s request, regarding compensation. A disabled or disfigured plaintiff would expect to receive a larger compensation package.
Another question that must be answered: Is there proof of fault?
As indicated above, whenever an accident victim has been injured while an opposing party has demonstrated obvious negligence, then the same party should expect to be hit for the resulting damages. The presence of witnesses strengthens the plaintiff’s case.
Witnesses might be able to attest to the liability of the opposing party. Even if there were no witnesses at the scene of the accident, someone might have viewed a useful piece of evidence. That is usually the situation in a public place, such as a store or a restaurant. Such establishments normally have signs posted in places where many people pass each day. At least one or 2 signs give directions, regarding the actions that should be taken by any customer.
Suppose that the plaintiff had followed those directions, and suppose the plaintiff still got hurt. That would indicate that either the directions were inadequate, or they were incorrect, because an existing system was not working right. Yet many customers had seen the directions. Hence their inadequacy, or mistaken information had been noted.