Minneapolis Injury Lawyers Answer Questions About Minnesota’s Comparative Negligence Law.
Minneapolis Injury Lawyers say the basis of any injury claim is the proof of fault.
In order for an injury or wrongful death victim to have a valid claim, they must be able to prove negligence or “fault” on the part of the party causing the injury or death.
Negligence is defined as “doing what a reasonable person would not do” or “failing to do what a reasonable person would do”.
Violation of a traffic law is considered negligence in the absence of some legal excuse.
Minneapolis Injury Lawyers say-The negligence or fault of all parties will be “compared”.
Often, juries will consider all parties, including those injured, to bear some percentage of fault. For that reason, juries are asked to “compare” the fault of the parties. If a driver is stopped legally for a stop sign and the car is “rear-ended“, the driver that collided with the rear of the car ahead is usually considered to be 100% at fault.
In intersection collisions, juries often find both parties at fault. In cases of an uncontrolled intersection (no traffic lights, stop sign, yield sign,) the two drivers will sometimes be determined to be 60-40% at fault, or 70-30%. The decision as to the percentage of fault to be divided between the two drivers is left to the jury. It is called “comparative fault“.
Minneapolis Injury Lawyers Work Hard To Collect and Preserve Evidence Regarding Fault.
The Minneapolis Injury Lawyers at the Schmidt Salita Law Team know that proof of fault is the cornerstone of any personal injury or wrongful death claim. For that reason, they work hard at the beginning of the case to collect evidence of fault. They obtain and review the State Accident Report as well as any investigation reports and audio-video (dash camera or body camera) from law enforcement. They get statements from witnesses when appropriate. They collect photos of the damaged vehicles and of the scene of the car accident.