Hearsay Evidence Cannot Be Introduced in Arizona Personal Injury Litigation

Motor vehicle accidents (like many other accident scenarios) are frequently decided on the basis of evidentiary issues.  The value of effectively navigating evidentiary conflicts cannot be understated — generally speaking, skilled litigators understand the value of favorably resolving evidentiary conflicts.  Doing so will almost certainly pay dividends further downstream in the litigation process. Perhaps the most commonly encountered evidentiary issue is that of hearsay evidence admission.  In Arizona, the success of your motor vehicle accident and car accident claims can turn on the application of the hearsay evidence rule, so it’s worth considering the rule and its fundamental limitations. Let’s take a look. Arizona Law Prohibits the Admission of Hearsay Evidence According to the Arizona Rules of Evidence section 801, hearsay evidence is defined as a statement that: the declarant makes outside of the current trial or hearing, and is offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. If the declarant testifies about a prior statement and is subject to cross-examination, or if a statement is offered into evidence against an opposing party, then — assuming that certain additional requirements are met (see section 801(d)(1) and (d)(2)), the statement will not be considered “hearsay” despite having been made out-of-court. Sifting through this legalese can be rather difficult.  Simply put, a hearsay statement is any out-of-court statement that is being offered to prove the content of the statement itself. For example, suppose that the defendant is attempting to minimize their liability by claiming that another […]

Recovering Damages for Injuries You Sustain in the Workplace

In Arizona, as in other states, workplace injuries (and other injuries sustained while performing one’s workplace duties, even off-site) can lead to quite a bit of confusion.  Many workers may not realize that they not only have the right to receive workers’ compensation benefits, but that they may also have a legitimate right of action against one or more defendants. If you were delivering pizzas, for example, and you were subsequently injured in a serious car accident, then you would not only be entitled to workers’ compensation benefits, but you may also have other claims worth pursuing. Workplace injuries can be particularly challenging from both an emotional and financial perspective.  Still, if you’ve suffered serious injuries, it’s critical that you consult with an attorney who can evaluate the situation and determine whether you have actionable claims — workers’ compensation benefits alone may be insufficient to account for your losses. Arizona “No Fault” Workers’ Compensation Workers’ compensation in the state of Arizona is mandatory — employers are required to pay for workers’ compensation insurance that covers their employees.  As such, if you are an employee and you are injured in a job-related incident (on-site or off-site), then you are almost certainly entitled to receive workers’ compensation benefits. Importantly, Arizona workers’ compensation is a “no-fault” system.  In no-fault systems, it is irrelevant whether you contributed to your own injuries (so long as you did not intentionally cause your own injuries).  Further, it is not necessary to prove that the employer acted negligently […]

Recovering From Multiple Defendants in Arizona — The Doctrine of Several Liability

Motor vehicle accidents — like many other accident scenarios — often involve multiple defendants.  Bringing an action against a single defendant is quite a bit different than suing multiple defendants, even if the case may seem uncomplicated upon first impression. For example, if you have been injured in a motor vehicle accident where two speeding cars collided with yours (on the highway), then you would have to sue and recover from each defendant separately.  Defendants are well aware of the fact that this burden is placed on the injured plaintiff, and may attempt to minimize their liabilities by shifting the greater portion of the blame to the other defendants in the case. Arizona Implements Several Liability, Not Joint Liability In Arizona, historically, the state implemented “joint and several” liability.  Joint and several liability gave the injured plaintiff a great deal of power — the plaintiff could sue any one of the defendants who contributed to their injuries, and in turn, recover the full amount of their damages from that one defendant, even if the defendant was only minimally liable for the injuries at-issue. For example, in a case with $1 million in damages, a defendant who was only 10 percent at-fault could be held liable for the entire $1 million! Unfortunately, lawmakers came to believe that the system was unfair to defendants, and abolished “joint and several” liability, replacing it with a system of pure several liability.  If you are injured in an accident in Arizona, you will therefore be […]

Can You Recover for the Wrongful Death of a Loved One?

In Arizona, as in other states, those who have lost a loved one to an accident (that was caused by another’s negligent, reckless, or intentional acts) may be entitled to recover damages pursuant to a wrongful death claim. How Do Wrongful Death Claims Work? Wrongful death claims give a right of action to certain surviving family members of the deceased, allowing those surviving family members to recover damages to compensate them for the various losses they suffered as a result of the death at-issue.  Importantly, wrongful death claims are not intended to compensate the surviving family members for the suffering of the deceased.  Instead, they are intended to compensate the surviving family members for their own damages. These damages may include: Out-of-pocket medical expenses paid by the surviving family member Funeral expenses paid by the surviving family member Loss of companionship Loss of consortium Loss of domestic services Loss of love and affection Loss of financial support Mental distress And more Suppose, for example, that a close relative — perhaps your father — was involved in a motor vehicle accident.  The accident did not immediately result in your father’s death.  He is rushed to the hospital.  After a few days in intensive care and a difficult struggle for survival, your father dies. In the above example, you cannot recover (in a wrongful death action) damages for your father’s pain and suffering, or for their medical expenses or wage loss.  You can only recover damages for your own losses.  If your […]