Q. What is a wrongful death action?
A. A wrongful death action is a lawsuit for damages filed by the spouse (not ex-spouse) and/or heirs of a deceased adult or by the parent(s) of a deceased unmarried adult who had no children or by the parent(s) of a deceased unmarried minor who had no children against the person or entity that wrongfully killed the deceased.
Continue Reading...In a rear end auto collision case, the Defendant is presumed by law to be at fault. The Defendant can overcome that presumption by proving, for example, that the Plaintiff slammed on the brakes and the Defendant couldn't stop in time.
However, in the case where the Plaintff was at a complete stop and the Defendant rear-ended the Plaintiff, the Defendant will not be able to overcome the presumption of liability. Nevertheless, Defendants rarely admit liability in litigation. They, or rather their attorneys - puppets of the insurance company, file an Answer admitting that the front of the Defendant's car struck the rear of the Plaintiff's car but they deny that the Defendant was at fault. After a year or more of litigation the case goes to trial. The Defendant has denied liability the entire way. Then, on the first day of trial the Defendant admits liability, says he's sorry, and says that he will be happy to pay what's reasonable.
The judge will not allow the Plaintiff to tell the jury that the Defendant has been denying liability from the start all the way to trial.
Q. Why would the Defendant deny liability all the way to trial and then admit liability?
A. (1) To punish the Plaintiff for filing a lawsuit by causing the Plaintiff to incur litigation expenses, delay, and frustration (Remember, the insurance company is paying for the attorney and litigation expenses, not the Defendant); (2) To teach the Plaintiff's attorney a lesson (If you file lawsuits you will be punished); (3) To advance the insurance industry agenda of punishing and preventing people from trying to recover for their injuries and damages; and (4) so that when the case goes to trial they can portrary the Plaintiff as greedy and the Defendant as magnanimous - admitting fault and being willing to pay a fair amount of damages (hoping of course that the jury is going to punish the Plaintiff by awarding little or no money damages - or at least not enought to have made the litigation economically productive).
Fort Collins Colorado Auto Accident Attorney Mac Hester
NOTE: This is only a summary of certain damage "caps" and should not be solely relied upon. The applicable statutes must be reviewed carefully, as the statutes contain conditions, qualifications, and exceptions; e.g., the Governmental Immunity Act has a strict 180 day notice requirement that must be formally complied with.
Fort Collins Colorado Automobile Injury Attorney Mac Hester
At common law, compensation paid to the injured person from a collateral source, independent of the tortfeasor, did not reduce the damages owed by the tortfeasor.
Now, by statute (C.R.S. 13-21-111.6), the trial court will reduce the verdict by the amount of collateral sources - except that the verdict cannot be reduced by compensation paid to the plaintiff as a result of a contract entered into and paid by or on behalf of the plaintiff. Quite often this "contract exception" swallows up the general rule of the statute, as shown in the cases below.
Continue Reading...Enter keywords:
