blog
Menu
Call Toll-Free 24 Hours:

Common Defenses For Car Accident Claims

Legally Reviewed and Edited by: Terry Cochran

If you file a compensation claim after a vehicle crash in Michigan, the other driver may use one of several common defenses to car accident claims to minimize your settlement. The at-fault party and their insurer will use these defenses to try and prove they are not responsible for your damages, leaving you with high medical bills and lost wages.

However, with skilled legal representation, you can submit evidence to refute these defenses and receive fair compensation for your injuries. Our experienced car accident attorneys from Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C. can help you fight against these common defenses to car accident claims to win your case and get you the compensation you deserve.

Common Defenses for Auto Accident Claims

When dealing with auto accident claims, there are several defenses that defendants may use to reduce or eliminate their liability. They are based on many factors, including the victim’s behavior, the defendant’s actions, and the circumstances of the accident. The following are some of the most common defenses for auto accident claims and how they may impact the outcome of your case.

Contributory Negligence and Comparative fault

Contributory negligence and comparative fault are legal defenses a defendant may use to avoid liability in a car accident claim. These defenses are based on the idea that the injured party may have contributed to the accident by being careless or by breaking traffic laws. By claiming contributory negligence or comparative fault, the defendant can try to reduce or eliminate their liability for the accident.

Michigan uses a modified comparative fault system. This doctrine bars car accident victims from receiving compensation if they are found to be more than 50% at fault for the accident. It also states that if the injured party is 50% or less at fault, their damages will be reduced in proportion to their percentage of fault.

The modified comparative fault system offers defendants in car crash claims a way to deny or reduce the damages they owe. Having a skilled attorney from Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C. on your side is vital to prove that the negligent party’s actions caused your injuries so you receive the financial restitution you are owed.

Lack of Fault by the Defendant

Lack of fault is a defense that a defendant may use in a car accident claim. Lack of fault means the defendant will try to show they didn’t cause the accident to avoid liability.

Michigan uses a no-fault insurance system for car accident claims. Under this system, each driver’s personal injury protection (PIP) insurance company pays for their lost wages and medical bills, no matter who was at fault for the crash. However, if a driver’s injuries are particularly severe, they may be able to file a lawsuit against the at-fault driver for additional damages.

For example, you were driving in Michigan and were hit by another driver who ran a red light. If the other driver’s insurance company accepts fault for the accident, they will be responsible for paying for your medical expenses and lost wages up to a certain amount.

If your injuries meet the threshold for serious impairment of body function, you may be able to file a lawsuit against the at-fault driver for additional damages, such as pain and suffering.

A defendant may submit evidence showing they did not cause the accident or that their actions were out of their control due to a medical emergency. If they succeed in establishing their lack of fault, you may not receive the compensation you deserve.

Assumption of Risk by the Injured Person

Assumption of risk argues that the victim knowingly and voluntarily assumed a risk that led to their injuries or damages and cannot recover compensation from the defendant.

Assumption of risk requires the defendant to prove that the victim had knowledge of the risk involved and chose to proceed anyway. For instance, if you knew there was ice on the road and drove on it anyway, you might be found to have assumed the risk of an accident.

However, it can be challenging for a defendant to prove an assumption of risk because they must show that you understood the risk and were not simply aware of the danger.

Examples of situations in which a victim may assume the risk in a car accident claim include:

  • Street racing
  • Off-road driving
  • Aggressive driving
  • Driving while high or drunk

Plaintiff’s Pre-Existing Injuries

A defendant in a car accident claim may use a pre-existing injury defense to deny or reduce your claim. This defense argues that your injuries were not caused by the accident but were pre-existing and unrelated to the collision.

If you had a pre-existing condition or injury aggravated in the collision, you may still be able to recover damages if your condition is exacerbated by the accident. However, you must prove that the accident caused the aggravation and that worsening the condition resulted in additional medical expenses or lost wages.

For example, you had a pre-existing back injury before a car accident in Michigan. After the accident, your back pain worsened, and you required additional medical treatment. The defendant may argue that your back pain was caused by a pre-existing injury, not the accident, and they are not responsible for any additional damages.

Our attorneys at Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C. can provide medical evidence showing that the accident aggravated your back pain and caused additional medical expenses.

Partner and nurse attorney Eileen Kroll will use her extensive medical knowledge to review your pre-existing medical records to determine the aspects of your condition that have worsened due to the accident. Eileen will work with a network of medical experts to perform testing and diagnosis to show that you did not have an injury before the collision or that your pre-existing issue worsened due to the crash.

If you have a pre-existing condition or injury, inform your attorney so we can gather relevant medical records to build a strong case on your behalf.

Sudden Emergencies

In rare cases, a defendant may use the sudden medical emergency defense to avoid liability. Michigan recognizes the sudden medical emergency defense, which says a driver experiencing a sudden medical emergency may not be liable for damages due to an unforeseen and uncontrollable medical situation.

The sudden medical emergency defense is used by drivers who claim that their medical condition caused them to lose control of their vehicle and that they should not be held liable for the resulting accident. If the driver can prove that they experienced a sudden medical emergency and that this event was unforeseeable, they may not be responsible for damages.

For example, if the defendant had a sudden heart attack while driving and caused your injuries, they may not be responsible. However, if the driver routinely takes medicine for their heart condition and it makes them drowsy, they may be liable because they knew the risk.

The sudden medical emergency defense is not always successful. The driver must prove that the medical emergency was truly unforeseeable and that they did not contribute to the accident in any way. They must also show that they acted reasonably to avoid injuring others on the road.

If there is evidence that the driver was feeling unwell before the accident, or if they have a history of medical conditions that could have contributed to the accident, they may still be held liable.

Faulty Road Conditions Defense

Faulty Road Conditions

If you’re involved in a car accident, the defendant may try to use the defense of faulty road conditions. This defense suggests that the accident was not caused by the defendant’s negligence but rather by a hazardous condition on the road that they could not have reasonably anticipated or avoided.

The burden of proof in this type of defense rests with the defendant. They must show that the condition of the road was the sole cause of the accident and that they were not in any way at fault.

If the defendant successfully uses the faulty road conditions defense, they may be able to avoid liability for the accident. This means you may not receive compensation for any damages or injuries you sustained.

Some examples of faulty road conditions that may be used as a defense include:

  • Poor lighting or visibility
  • Potholes or uneven pavement
  • Inadequate signage or road markings
  • Obstructions on the road, such as fallen trees or debris
  • Dangerous curves or intersections
  • Construction or maintenance work that creates hazardous conditions

The existence of these conditions does not automatically absolve the defendant of liability. The defendant must prove that they could not avoid the hazardous condition and that it was the sole cause of the accident.

If the road conditions did play a part in the accident that caused your injuries, work with your attorney from Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C. to determine fault. We can help you file a claim against the municipal or government entity responsible for maintaining the roadways.

Fight Negligent Driver Defenses With Help From Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C.

If you have been involved in a car accident, there are several legal issues and defenses that a negligent driver and their insurer will use to deny your claim.

A lawyer from Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C. can help you navigate your accident claim, prove negligence, and refute their defenses with reliable evidence in your favor. We will negotiate with the insurance company for fair compensation for your injuries and damages.

We specialize in personal injury cases, including car accident claims. Our team of experienced lawyers can help you understand your legal options and represent you in court for your accident claim and fight against common defenses for car accident claims.

Our contingency fee basis means we only get paid if we win your case, so there is no financial risk to you to get started. Call our law firm today at 1-866-MICH-LAW and schedule your no-obligation, free case evaluation.

Disclaimer : The information provided is general and not for legal advice. The blogs are not intended to provide legal counsel and no attorney-client relationship is created nor intended.

Lynn Mayfield is a writer and has worked in finance and education. Lynn earned her Master's Degree in Education and now writes informative articles for various legal organizations. She enjoys drinking coffee and spending time outdoors.

CALL TOLL-FREE | 24 HOURS

RESULTS-DRIVEN TRACK RECORD

Testimonial Image

FREE CONSULTATION NO FEES UNTIL WE WIN

There is no obligation for a case evaluation & no fee is charged unless a recovery is made.
  • Disclaimer: Please note that we are currently accepting cases for Michigan residents only, except for product liability cases, which we handle nationwide.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Your privacy is important to us. Cochran, Kroll & Associates, P.C. does not share, sell, rent, or trade personally identifiable or confidential information with third parties for any purpose.
Call Now Button