|
|
|
Making Common Sense of the Law |
By
David Day
While certain accidents involve factors which make it relatively easy to assign
liability, it is not always as simple to lay the blame for others. In all
cases, however, the law initially asks one common sense question in order to
decide who is legally responsible. That is, did the accident victim act with
reasonable care, or did he or she act carelessly in a way that contributed to
the accident? If the injured party was acting carefully and the other party's
carelessness or negligence led to the accident, then the other party may be
legally responsible. If the victim had any responsibility for the accident,
then under Tennessee law, the fault of the drivers is compared. This legal
concept is called "comparative fault."
Under the doctrine of comparative fault, the victim's damages are reduced by
his or her fault. For instance if a person has $10,000 in damages and is 10%
at fault, that person can recover $9000. If the claimant is 50% or more at
fault, then he or she can recover nothing.
In my experience, I have seen that in many consider "open and
closed" cases of fault, a jury will place some of the fault on the
victim. This is often because the nature of accidents are more complicated
than a cursory explanation allows, and at trial, details of the accident come
out that are not considered in casual conversation of these so-called
"open and shut" cases. When you are in an accident, it is important
to discuss all of the facts with your attorney so that your attorney can
discuss with you the potential problems involved with Tennessee's comparative
fault law. |
|
