Proving a Car Accident Lawsuit in New York
After a relatively minor crash, a victim may not need more compensation than what the no-fault insurance system in New York provides. Getting these benefits does not require showing that anyone caused the accident. However, no-fault insurance likely will not go far enough after a devastating crash.
A victim can go outside the no-fault system to sue an at-fault driver or vehicle owner for economic damages that exceed the “basic economic loss” addressed by no-fault benefits, and for non-economic damages if they suffer a “serious injury” as defined by the New York Insurance Law. (They can potentially sue other defendants without meeting these requirements, although the no-fault insurer would have a lien on the amount that the victim recovers to the extent of benefits that were paid or payable to them.) In the lawsuit, the victim would need to prove the liability of the defendant.
Proving Liability Through a Negligence Claim in New York
Proving liability for a car accident usually involves a negligence claim. In the 2022 case of Ferreira v. City of Binghamton, the New York Court of Appeals reaffirmed that a plaintiff in a negligence case must show a duty that the defendant owed to the plaintiff, a breach of the duty, and an injury resulting from the breach. Every driver on the road has a duty to drive safely and avoid posing foreseeable risks to people around them. A breach of this duty could take many forms, such as:
- Running a red light or stop sign
- Getting distracted behind the wheel
- Driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs
- Speeding excessively
- Engaging in aggressive driving behaviors, such as tailgating
- Failing to account for adverse weather conditions, like snow or fog
Many breaches of the duty to drive safely also violate various provisions in the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law. New York courts have found that violations of these statutes trigger the doctrine of negligence per se. Under this theory, a victim only needs to prove that the defendant violated the Vehicle and Traffic Law and that the violation caused the accident. The proof of the statutory violation substitutes for the elements of duty and breach.
One of the most common types of crashes is a rear-end collision. Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 1129 prohibits following more closely than is reasonable and prudent. A violation of this provision will lead to liability for any resulting accident. Correspondingly, New York courts have found that a rear-end collision creates an inference that the driver of the rear vehicle was negligent. (Some courts have described this rule as applying when the front vehicle is stopped, stopping, or slowing down.) The rear driver can rebut this inference by providing another explanation for the crash.
Whom to Sue After a New York Accident
While a car accident generally results from the carelessness of one or more drivers, a victim might consider suing other defendants in certain situations. For example, Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 388 may impose liability on the owner of a vehicle. This theory applies when a driver who is using or operating the vehicle with the express or implied permission of the owner causes property damage or injuries due to their negligence.
Furthermore, the employer of a driver sometimes may be held indirectly liable for the driver’s negligence under the doctrine of respondeat superior. New York courts have applied this doctrine to hold an employer liable for the negligent acts of their employees if these acts were committed in furtherance of the employer’s business and within the scope of employment.
In other cases, improper maintenance or an auto defect might contribute to an accident. A victim might sue a repair shop or maintenance company for its negligence in identifying and fixing a problem. If they bring a claim against a car manufacturer based on an auto defect, they likely could use a theory of strict liability instead of negligence. The Court of Appeals has explained that this theory involves proving that a defect was a substantial factor in causing the injuries. A victim does not need to prove a lack of proper care.
Sometimes a government entity bears responsibility for a crash. This might involve defective road design or a failure to properly maintain a road, among other issues. Suing the government requires meeting strict procedural rules, so a victim should act promptly if they think that they may have this type of claim.
If a driver was drunk at the time of a crash, a victim might have a claim against the business that served the driver under the New York dram shop law, codified at General Obligations Law Section 11-101. This provides that a victim of a drunk driving accident can sue someone who unlawfully sold alcohol to the drunk driver, thus causing or contributing to their intoxication.
Evidence of Liability and Damages
Regardless of whom they decide to sue, a victim will need to gather and present evidence to prove the liability of the defendant and the damages that they have incurred. This may include photos and videos from the accident scene, as well as testimony from eyewitnesses. Experts such as accident reconstructionists or engineers also may help explain why the defendant was at fault for the crash.
Medical records and photos of injuries can help prove the harm caused by the accident. Medical bills, pay stubs, and documentation of out-of-pocket costs like home or vehicle modifications can quantify financial losses. If the victim has a long-term disability due to the crash, they might use testimony from medical, vocational, or economic experts to describe its impact on their life in the future. Testimony from family members, friends, and people in the community might help show their reduced quality of life.
The situation of each victim is unique, and the evidence vital to proving their claim will depend on their circumstances. A car accident lawyer can help collect this evidence, while investigating the accident and identifying the appropriate defendants to sue.
