Articles Tagged with personal injury attorney Fort Lauderdale

Car accidents happen every day in Florida – about 1,095 times a day, to be exact. In some of those instances, more than one person may be at-fault.Fort Lauderdale injury lawyer

They may not be equally at-fault. But as a Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyer can explain, the fact that an injured party was partly responsible for a crash does not bar them from seeking compensation from the other party, at least not in Florida. That’s thanks to a doctrine known as comparative fault.

Broadly, comparative fault (also called comparative negligence or contributory negligence) is a partial legal defense that can reduce the amount of monetary damages a plaintiff can recover in a negligence-based claim. It’s based on the degree to which the plaintiff’s own fault, negligence, or wrongdoing contributed to cause the injury or exacerbate it.

For example, if Person A runs a red light and causes a crash that injures Person B, the latter has a legitimate claim against the former. This is true even if Person B also happened to be speeding at the time of the crash, thereby making their injuries more severe than they might have been otherwise. In this situation, a jury may find that Person A was 80% at fault and Person B was 20% at fault. If the total damages were $100,000, then Person B’s total damages would be reduced according to their own fault – so by 20%. That means the most they could recover in that scenario would be $80,000.

Florida has been a pure comparative fault state since 1973. That meant that even if you were 99% at fault for the injury you sustained, you could still pursue legal action against the other person for their 1% of fault.

However, that changed in March 2023, with updates to F.S. 768.81, Florida’s comparative fault law. The statute was changed to say that if you are 51% or more responsible for your own injuries, then you cannot recover any damages at all. However, you could be 50% at fault and still recover the other 50% from other at-fault parties. Continue reading

Employers have a responsibility to provide a safe working environment. Failure to do so may result in a fine by government regulators. Workers’ compensation – the exclusive remedy for employees against their employers for job-related injuries – is paid on a no-fault basis. That means workers who are injured in Florida don’t need to prove their employer acted in a manner that was negligent in order to collect compensation.work injury lawyer

Third parties, meanwhile, can be liable and compelled to pay damages to the person injured on top of what he/ she receives for workers’ compensation – but only if the plaintiff can prove the third party negligent.

Many serious Florida work injuries involve some type of fault from a third party, whether that’s:

  • A general contractor or property owner who fails to make sure the work site is free from an unreasonable risk of hazards (known or foreseeable);
  • A negligent driver who strikes a work crew on the road;
  • A product manufacturer that designed/ made/ sold a heavy machine that is unreasonably dangerous, even when operated as intended.

Continue reading

A $19 million damage award for the widow of a fatal railroad car accident victim was affirmed in Missouri, finding the circuit court didn’t err when finding the railroad company 95 percent liable for failure to trim vegetation surrounding the railroad tracks.¬†car accident attorney

The appeal from the railroad company stemmed from the argument a new trial was warranted due to an alleged error by the trial court of not granting a motion for a new trial based on the intentional nondisclosures of prior car accident litigation by a juror. Ultimately, the state supreme court determined that defense attorneys could have discovered the juror’s litigation history had they re-ran her name through a standard background search once they became aware (at the juror’s notification) that her name was misspelled by the clerk of courts.

The case is worth noting for the fact that this is one of those errors that could potentially happen to either attorney in this case, and there are so many technicalities can impact the outcome. That’s why it’s so important to have an eagle-eyed personal injury attorney in Fort Lauderdale working on your behalf. Continue reading

Many of those who suffer a Fort Lauderdale work injury are prescribed opioid medications to help cope with acute pain. However, a recent study revealed opioid prescriptions have an adverse affect on workers the longer they are used, ultimately increasing the duration of temporary disability claimed by workers with a myriad of injuries.construction accident attorney

The study by the Workers’ Compensation Research Institute¬†analyzed worker back injuries in 28 states over a recent five-year stretch in cases where workers took seven days or more off work. Within these numbers, they analyzed whether the workers were prescribed an opioid painkiller, if they received multiple opioids and the duration of those medications (considering long-term use to mean prescriptions within the first three months of injury extending into the 12-month mark). Then they compared this data to the length of workers’ temporary disability.

They discovered that workers prescribed opiates long-term were on temporary disability three times as long as those who had filed claims yet not received opiates. Those who were only prescribed these powerful painkillers within the first three months, but not thereafter, did not show a substantial impact on disability duration. Study authors also concluded workers employed and residing in “high prescription” regions were more likely to receive a prescription for opioids, regardless of injury. Continue reading

Dog bite injuries in Florida are handled under a legal theory known as “strict liability.” What this means is, according to F.S.767.04, a dog owner may be liable if his or her dog bites someone – even if that dog had no history of any vicious behavior and even if owner had no prior warning or knowledge the dog might bite. The injured person does not have to prove the owner’s failure to use reasonable care played any sort of role in causing the bite. Rather, they must show the defendant owned/ controlled the dog, the dog bit the victim, that bite caused injury to victim.Police Dogs

There are, however, a few exceptions to the rule. Those include:

  • The person who was bitten was not lawfully in the place where the bite occurred. (In other words, he/she was trespassing.)
  • Comparative negligence. This asserts the dog bite victim’s own negligence was partially to blame for causing the bite. This generally doesn’t apply to children under the age of 6.

Continue reading

Contact Information