When A Spinal Injury Becomes The Reason For A Lawsuit
Because of its connection to the brain, an injury to the spinal cord can affect the lifestyle of the unfortunate victim. For that reason, Accident Lawyers in Coquitlam want those same victims to understand the basics of a lawsuit.
What part of the body malfunctions, following a spinal cord injury?
Harm has been done to the bundle of nerves in the backbone. Depending on the location at which the harmful effects of an accident got felt, 2 to 4 limbs might fail to function properly.
Someone that has developed paraplegia has become paralyzed in the lower parts of the body. Someone that has suffered quadriplegia has become paralyzed in all four limbs. Other voluntary muscles may also be affected.
What might be the basis of a lawsuit for a spinal cord injury?
• The victim might be suing a negligent driver, someone that caused a car accident.
• The victim might have chosen to sue the maker of a defective product, such as a defective seat belt or a malfunctioning air bag.
• The victim might have been taking part in some sports activity or some other recreational activity.
• The victim’s decision to file a lawsuit might have resulted from the actions of a surgeon, one that made a mistake during an operation, and thus damaged the patient’s/victim’s spinal cord.
What sort of defenses are used most often by the team that is defending the party that is being held responsible for the victim’s damaged spinal cord?
Depending on the jurisdiction in which the accident took place, the defense team could enter a charge of contributory or comparative negligence. If the jury were to agree with that charge, the amount of the compensation would be reduced, in accordance with the laws of that particular jurisdiction.
If the legal system applied traditional comparative negligence, the victim’s compensation would be reduced by the percent/degree that his or her actions caused the accident. If the law applied modified comparative negligence, then the victim would get a part of the compensation if he or she had not increased the chances of an accident by more than 50%.
The same victim would be out-of-luck, if the law in the appropriate jurisdiction applied the principle of contributory negligence. In that case, any evidence that a victim has contributed to the occurrence of an accident deprives that same victim of receiving any compensation.
The other common defense is assumption of risk. It alleges that the victim knew the risks associated with the activity that caused the accident. The defense then argues that the plaintiff ignored the known risk, and took part in a risky activity.
What compensation should cover?
• Cost of healthcare and rehabilitation.
• Cost of assistive devices.
• Modifications to home