The lawyers of this fair city are not sporting with your feelings, mocking you as a person, or otherwise demeaning the pain and suffering you have no doubt endured as a direct consequence of the accident in question. You may find more details about this at try this.
Rather, they are just relieved that they finally have an automobile related personal injury lawsuit which is actually straightforward for a change! These types of personal injury lawsuits can be extremely difficult and challenging to try and reach a satisfactory outcome, and oftentimes, victims leave the court feeling extremely disgruntled and dismayed by the court’s decision.
This is because of one of the most despised and misunderstood terms in legal jargon: “contributory negligence.” In essence, contributory negligence (AKA the attorney’s nightmare) is the legal principle that if a person bringing a personal injury lawsuit was responsible to any extent, for their own injuries then they cannot receive any compensation.
In a rare, and frankly, refreshing inversion of this pedantically fussy rule, is the rear end collision scenario which will invariably mean that the plaintiff is able to recover full damages from the negligent driver. What if the victim’s car stopped for whatever reason? It does not matter. But surely this is a direct contradiction to the limitations identified by the contributory negligence clause? No.
The reason for this is very simple: one of the most fundamental and imperative rules of driving, which is known the world over and implemented to a similar degree across every nation is the concept that when you are on the road, you are legally obligated to leave a sufficient buffer space between your vehicle and the one immediately in front of you. The reason for this is to safeguard against precisely this sort of situation from happening and so if a driver of a vehicle which is behind you does bump into you in this manner then they are not driving responsibly.
In the event that there is any doubt (invariably, the attorneys for the defendant will invariably try and obfuscate the case for their client’s benefit) the issue can also be readily resolved by examining the extent of damage that has been inflicted onto the cars.
At the risk of sounding painfully obvious, if one car’s front end has been damaged, and the rear end of a car has been damaged then it does not take Poirot to determine who is at fault.
Some people get a little concerned whenever they bring a lawsuit in regards to a rear end collision to their car and when the driver responsible for the damage has launched a lawsuit against another driver who made you stop your car suddenly. Rest assured, this will have no prejudicial impact on your case.