–Injury Lawyers – Page 5

If you have been seriously injured in a car accident (due to the negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct of another party), then Arizona law may give you a right to secure compensation for your losses, including losses relating to any disability that results from the accident.

Damages for disabilities sustained due to an accident can vary substantially depending on the activities of the plaintiff and the length of the disability at-issue.  For example, if you are a highly-active socialite and enjoy outdoor recreational activities, then your disabling condition may preclude you from not only working in your profession, but may also preclude you from engaging in the social and recreational activities that once defined your lifestyle.  These damages can be difficult to measure, but may be significant.

Disability Benefits and Occupational Deficits

There is quite a bit of variation when it comes to disability insurance plans.  In some plans, a disability is strictly defined as a condition that precludes the claimant from working in “any” occupation, whereas in other plans, a disability is more broadly defined as a condition that precludes the claimant from working in their “own” existing occupation.

For example, suppose that you purchased disability insurance coverage that includes an “own occupation” definition of a disabling condition.  You are then involved in a car accident, where you suffer a back injury.  Your current career is as a physical laborer in a warehouse.  Due to the back injury, however, you are permanently rendered incapable of performing your current job duties.  Given the “own occupation” definition, you would be entitled to benefits.  If the definition had been “any occupation,” however, then you may have been precluded from claiming benefits due to the possibility of obtaining alternative office work.

Application of the Collateral Source Rule Allows for Full Damage Recovery

Arizona enforces the collateral source rule, which prohibits the jury from considering evidence relating to the plaintiff’s receipt of benefits and other forms of compensation from third-party sources (i.e., medical expenses reimbursement pursuant to health insurance coverage, and disability benefits pursuant to private disability insurance coverage).

Simply put, the courts will not allow the receipt of such benefits to affect the plaintiff’s ability to recover full and adequate damages to cover their losses, even if doing so allows the plaintiff to obtain a “double recovery” of sorts.  The intention behind the collateral source rule is essentially to shift the risk-burden to the defendant.  Were the collateral source rule not applied in Arizona, then the fact that a plaintiff had the good sense to purchase disability insurance coverage would reduce the liability of the defendant — and this would benefit the at-fault defendant, as opposed to the plaintiff.

Schedule a Free Consultation With an Experienced Phoenix Car Accident Lawyer Today

If you have sustained serious injuries in a car accident and are now suffering from a disabling condition, then you may be entitled to disability benefits (public or private) as well as significant damages pursuant to a lawsuit.  Arizona law provides for a full and adequate damage recovery even where disability benefits are paid out to the injured plaintiff.  However, given the complexities of disputes in which a disabling condition resulted from the accident, it’s important to consult with a qualified attorney who has extensive experience handling such claims.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, we approach litigation differently.  Unlike many other firms, we have a fundamentally client-oriented outlook, as we believe that truly effective litigation demands an individualized, “client-first” form of advocacy.

In fact, from the very beginning of the engagement process with our clients, this unique approach plays out in a variety of ways.  Our clients are encouraged to get in touch if they have any questions or concerns, and we put forth a great deal of effort to ensure that clients are kept apprised of case developments as litigation proceeds.  We are dedicated to maintaining a strong relationship with our clients, and to that end, we make house calls and hospital visits when necessary.

Interested in learning more about your claims and whether it is worth pursuing litigation?

Call 602-535-1900 or submit an online case evaluation form through our website to schedule a free and confidential consultation with an experienced Phoenix car accident lawyer here at Hirsch & Lyon.

If you have sustained serious injuries in a pedestrian accident while you were walking on a roadway, then you might be somewhat confused as to your rights — after all, it may not be clear whether you were actually entitled to walk on the roadway (under Arizona law) at the time of the collision.

Arizona regulates pedestrian roadway use quite stringently.  Let’s take a look at the basics.

Sidewalk Use is Highly Controlled

Section 28-796 of the Arizona Revised Statutes governs pedestrian use of roadways in situations where sidewalks may or may not be present.  More specifically, Arizona statutory law prohibits pedestrian use of roadways when there are sidewalks on (or adjacent to) the roadway at-issue.

Where no sidewalk has been provided, pedestrians are allowed to walk along the roadway, but this accessibility is limited.  Pedestrians may only walk:

1. On the left side of the roadway, or
2. On the shoulder of the roadway, facing traffic that may be approaching from the opposite direction.

Further, you may not stand in a roadway — even briefly — to solicit a ride.  For example, it is illegal to step onto the road to call a taxicab.  You must stay on the sidewalk (assuming that a sidewalk has been provided).

Arizona Comparative Negligence

In the event that you did, in fact, violate the various statutory regulations concerning sidewalk use and pedestrian roadway use, then Arizona law may not necessarily preclude you from suing and recovering damages for your injuries — though your recovery will likely be influenced quite significantly.

Arizona applies pure comparative negligence rules.  In other words, an injured plaintiff may bring an action for damages in situations where they are at-fault, even if they are 99 percent at-fault for their own injuries.  Critically, however, the total damages will be reduced by their proportional fault contribution.

For example, suppose that you are hit by a car while traveling on a roadway without a sidewalk.  Your damages total $100,000.  As it turns out, you were walking in the same direction as traffic, and therefore were violated section 28-796(b) of the pedestrian roadway regulation.  The court determines that you are 50 percent at-fault, and that the defendant-driver is 50 percent at-fault.  You are entitled to recover $50,000.

Contact a Skilled Phoenix Pedestrian Accident Attorney for Assistance With Your Claims

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys bring to bear over six decades of combined experience handling claims relating to motor vehicle accidents and pedestrian accidents, and have successfully resolved numerous lawsuits over the years, including those that involve pedestrian roadway collisions.

Unlike many other personal injury firms, we are committed to the provision of client-oriented legal advocacy — as such, we make ourselves available 24/7 to answer any questions or concerns you may have, and we even offer discounted contingency fees so that our clients can keep more of what they secure through a verdict or settlement.  This approach has brought us a significant amount of success over the years, reflected in our case results.

Interested in learning more about your claims?

Call (602) 535-1900 today to schedule a free and confidential consultation with an experienced Phoenix pedestrian accident attorney at Hirsch & Lyon.  We look forward to helping you move forward with your lawsuit.

If you or anyone close to you has ever been hit by a car, you can imagine how terrifying and baffling the situation can be. Economic and noneconomic losses triggered by another driver’s carelessness brings upon a great deal of financial and emotional burden. Unfortunately, you cannot press a rewind button and escape what has happened. The least you can do to get closure is making the offender pay for their negligent behavior. Luckily, the law permits you to demand compensation for your medical bills and property damage. The money you receive from the defendant may not alleviate your pain, but it sure can solve your money problems and save you from drowning in debt. In order to make that happen, you need a car accident attorney to review your case and help you file a personal injury claim.

Following the accident, you need to consult a lawyer as soon as possible. A legal representative is integral to the success of your case because:

They know what to do

A person who has never encountered a car accident or any other legal issue in the past is naturally clueless. He/she does not know where to go from there or understand the right course of action. The person may unknowingly say or do something that incriminates them or jeopardizes their case. People around might misguide them and reduce the possibility of obtaining compensation. A car accident lawyer can handle everything for you, starting from talking to the police to collecting evidence and filing the lawsuit.

They are masters of negotiation

You are likely to be shook after the accident, thus your ability to negotiate with the opposition will falter. The defendant and their insurance company will not make the transaction any easy. They will try their best to undermine your claim and defy your rights, by exploiting your lack of knowledge. They might offer you a meager settlement that only partially covers the cost of your damages. Lawyers are well aware of all the antics and can tell when the opposition is simply bluffing to sidetrack your focus. They are trained to bargain and conjure up convincing arguments, which is guaranteed to work in your favor.

They are problem solvers

Auto accident cases can be complicated and sometimes proving the burden of liability becomes tricky. Professional and experienced car accident attorneys have the brains and skills to figure out problematic stances. They have a qualified team to thoroughly investigate the matter and fill any information gaps. They can uncover evidence that the average person could never even think of. Precisely, your lawyer will always have your back, whether it’s about verifying your medical records or providing a testimony in court.

They are capable of making better decisions

Car accident victims are in no position of making life-changing decisions. Their pain and suffering prohibits them from thinking straight or acting rational. A personal injury attorney understands that their client is overwhelmed by emotions, which can potentially become an obstacle for their success in the lawsuit. Therefore, they will do everything in their power to rescue you from a regretful future.

They maximize your interests

The insurance company does not care about your wellbeing, regardless of what they say. They will only manipulate you to reduce their payout and coax you into accepting a measly settlement. Your lawyer is the only one who can recognize their hypocrisy and fight for the compensation you deserve. By taking the case to trial, the lawyer may help you win additional benefits, such as reimbursement for punitive damages.

They allow you peace of mind

PTSD, anxiety, and depression are common among survivors of car accidents. They need time to heal and cope with their loss. Legal procedures of a personal injury claim/lawsuit only add to their stress. By hiring a Houston car accident attorney, you don’t have to face all the troubles, as he/she will take care of everything for you. You can recover in peace while your lawyer deals with the paperwork and other legal requirements.

Truck accidents are not only quite common, but they tend to give rise to more severe injuries than other types of auto accidents, in major part because the impact force caused by a truck tends to be much higher on average.  As such, it’s critically important that truck drivers are considerate of unique the risks involved in operating their vehicles, and that they drive appropriately so as to minimize those risks to the best degree possible.

If you have suffered injuries in a truck accident scenario, then you may have a right of action against the truck driver — and potentially even their employer — for damages under Arizona law.  In Arizona, and elsewhere, truck accidents (whether involving a commercial truck or a personal vehicle) may be caused by a range of negligence-related factors.

Consider the following.

Improper Cargo Loading

Improper cargo loading is perhaps one of the most common causes of truck accidents, as it can lead to rollover risks.  Truck drivers — along with cargo loaders, supervisors, etc. — must make reasonable efforts to ensure that cargo has been loaded appropriately so as to avoid a heightened rollover risk.  This applies to non-commercial contexts, too.  For example, if the defendant has rented a U-Haul truck, and decides to load all their heavy furniture to one side of the truck, then that could lead to a rollover accident.

Failure to Properly Maintain Vehicle

Trucks must be adequately maintained to prevent mechanical issues that could lead to an accident on the road.  In the commercial context, a number of state and federal regulations govern inspections — failure to adhere to these rules may expose the driver and their employer to significant liability.

Intoxication, Stimulant Use, and Exhausted Driving

Intoxicated driving (i.e., intoxication through drugs or alcohol) is a common factor leading to truck accidents, and in many scenarios is a response to the exhausting schedules imposed on truck drivers.  In an effort to stay awake or better manage their emotions (that have suffered due to exhaustion), some truck drivers may consume alcohol, or take various drugs and stimulants.  This can give the truck driver a false, positive impression of their ability to control the vehicle, however, when the safer option would simply be to rest.

Depending on the circumstances, you may be entitled to bring an action against the employer if the employer knew or reasonably should have known that the driver in question would be taking drugs while operating the truck.

Inadequate Licensing

In some cases, employers may fail to perform comprehensive, adequate background checks of their truck drivers, which can lead to situations where a truck driver does not have a valid license to operate a particular class of commercial vehicle.  An improperly-licensed driver is a dangerous one — others on the roadway may be exposed to an unreasonable risk of injury due to the driver’s lack of experience and/or assumed incompetence, given that they have not been qualified by the government.

Speeding

In the commercial context, truck drivers are often seriously strained by their employers to perform their job duties within highly time-crunched schedules, and as such, may feel as though they have to “speed” in order to accomplish their tasks before the deadline passes.  As compensation (and job security) can be linked to timeliness, the pressure to speed is rather significant.

Speeding trucks present an even greater danger on roadways than speeding cars and motorcycles, for obvious reasons — a speeding truck carries a sizable mass, and thus requires more space to come to a complete stop.  This is particularly true when the truck is loaded down with heavy cargo.  When a truck is excessively speeding, it may not be capable of engaging an immediate stop in the event of sudden road interference (i.e., a car pulls in front of the truck while it is speeding).

Schedule a Free Consultation 

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys have decades of experience handling auto accident claims involving cars, trucks, motorcycles, and pedestrians.  We understand that otherwise straightforward injury lawsuits can be complicated by a range of factors that arise during litigation, and as such, we have dedicated our practice to personal injury, specifically — this focus has given us deep insight into what makes for an effective truck accident claim.

We are results-oriented, and believe that our unique, specialized approach to litigation has paid significant dividends.  Over the years, we have secured well over 100 million dollars on behalf of injured clients, through favorable verdicts and negotiated settlements.  Further, we offer discounted contingency fees, so our clients can keep more of what they receive.

Interested in learning more about your claims and the steps necessary to effectively secure damages?  Call (602) 535-1900 or submit an online claim evaluation form to schedule a free and confidential consultation with a seasoned attorney here at Hirsch & Lyon.  We look forward to assisting you.

In Arizona, and elsewhere, motorcyclists sometimes attempt to split lanes in an effort to cut through traffic and avoid the gridlock.  This is perfectly natural, of course — many motorcyclists see lane splitting as a maneuver that is meant to take advantage of the unique dimensions of a two-wheeled vehicle.  Motorcyclists (like most others on the road) tend to also see themselves as exemplary operators and may therefore find any restriction on lane splitting to be questionable.

In reality, however, lane splitting can expose both motorcyclists and others to a significant risk of injury.  It should come as no surprise that Arizona and most other states have regulated lane splitting in an effort to minimize the occurrence of motorcycle accidents (and the injury claims that may result from such behaviors).  As per section 28-903 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, the state imposes a complete ban on motorcycle lane splitting.

How does this effect damage recovery in a motorcycle accident?  Let’s take a look.

Recovering Damages in a Lane Splitting Accident

Given that lane splitting is banned in Arizona by statute, if you are involved in an accident while you are splitting a lane (i.e., riding between two lanes of traffic or between adjacent rows of vehicles), then you will be found negligent per se.

Importantly, however, the fact that you are negligent for violating the lane splitting prohibition is not — in and of itself — enough to prevent you from successfully recovering damages in an accident.  Arizona implements the pure comparative fault doctrine, which allows injured plaintiffs to recover damages even if they acted negligently and thus contributed to their own injuries.  The total damages will simply be reduced in proportion to their own fault contribution.

For example, if you are found 50 percent at-fault in a lane splitting accident where the damages total $100,000, then you would be entitled to recover $50,000.

The fundamental question in a lane splitting accident, then, is whether the defendant is responsible — even partially — for your injuries.  The defendant is still required to exercise reasonable care given the circumstances.  For example, if the defendant can see that you are lane splitting (despite it being against the law in Arizona), then they must act accordingly and avoid blocking your path.  If they do so, then it’s likely that a court would find the defendant negligent, and therefore liable.

Contact Our Experienced Phoenix Motorcycle Accident Attorneys for Guidance

If you have suffered injuries in a motorcycle accident — whether or not you were lane splitting at the time of the accident — then Arizona law may give you a right of action against the defendant for damages.  Motorcycle accident litigation can be quite challenging in situations where there are lingering concerns over the injured motorcyclist’s own contribution to the accident, however.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys have more than 65 years of combined experience representing injury victims in a range of auto accident disputes, including motorcycle accidents.

Interested in speaking to an attorney directly?  Call 602-535-1900 or submit an online claim form through our website to schedule a free and confidential consultation with one of our seasoned Phoenix motorcycle accident attorneys.

In Arizona, and elsewhere, the surviving family members of an individual who has died due to the negligence or wrongful misconduct of another party are entitled to sue and recover damages pursuant to a wrongful death action — and in some cases, pursuant to a survival action.  Though the two actions are closely-related in many respects, there are fundamental differences that are worth evaluating.

Consider the following.

The Basis of the Action is Different

Survival actions are brought on behalf of the deceased with the intention of recovering losses that were suffered by the deceased directly (prior to their death).  If the deceased dies instantly in an accident, for example, there would likely not be an actionable claim on this basis.  On the other hand, if the deceased is injured in a car accident, and their condition worsens over the course of a month before they die, then their estate would likely be entitled to bring a survival action for significant damages.

Wrongful death actions are independent of survival actions, and meant to account for the losses suffered by the surviving family members of the deceased — for example, damages for wrongful death may cover the mental anguish suffered by a surviving spouse after the death of their husband.

If you believe that you may have a legitimate survival action or wrongful death action, it’s important to get in touch with a qualified Phoenix wrongful death attorney for further assistance and an evaluation of your claims.

Debtors, Creditors, and Liabilities

Wrongful death damages belong to you — the qualified, surviving family member entitled to such damages — and are therefore not subject to the claims of debtors and creditors that might otherwise attempt to access funds belonging to the estate of the deceased.  The damages obtained in a survival action, by contrast, goes to the estate of the deceased, and is therefore vulnerable to debtor and creditor interference.

Available Damages

Wrongful death damages include, but are not necessarily limited, to:

• Loss of companionship, guidance, and love
• Loss of consortium
• Loss of services
• Financial support
• Mental anguish
• Expenses (i.e., medical, funeral) relating to the deceased
• And more

By contrast, survival actions may include the following damages (suffered directly by the deceased prior to their death):

• Funeral expenses
• Medical expenses
• Lost wages
• Pain and suffering
• Property loss
• And more

The Parties’ Right of Action

Survival actions and wrongful death actions are quite different in terms of who has a right to file a lawsuit and secure damages.  In wrongful death actions, only qualified family members (i.e., surviving spouse, descendants, parents, siblings, etc.), as identified and established by Arizona statute, may bring a lawsuit against the defendant for damages.

Survival actions are more limited.  In a survival action, the surviving family members are not entitled to bring a lawsuit against the defendant, as the damages do not directly belong to them — it is the estate of the deceased that has the right to bring a lawsuit against the liable defendant.  Of course, once the personal representative of the estate has secured damages in a survival action, the family members can access the damages at-issue when the estate assets are eventually distributed to the beneficiaries (assuming that the family members are beneficiaries).

Negligence and Wrongful Misconduct

When contemplating either a survival action or a wrongful death action, it’s important to note that neither claim will stand without proof of negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct on the part of the defendant.  You cannot succeed in securing damages on the basis of a survival action or wrongful death action without being able to show that the defendant at-issue acted in a negligent or wrongful manner, thus causing your loved one to suffer fatal injuries.

For example, suppose that you are bringing a wrongful death action against a driver for colliding with your sibling, which resulted in their death.  If the driver clearly demonstrates that their actions were not negligent or wrongful — perhaps the driver was involuntarily intoxicated and is thus shielded from liability — then you are not entitled to damages.  It is not enough that your loved one died.  It must be the result of another’s negligent or wrongful conduct.

If you are injured in a car accident where the collision is caused by the defendant’s failure to maintain their vehicle in a reasonably safe condition, then you may have a right of action against the defendant for damages.  In Arizona, and elsewhere, drivers have a duty to maintain their vehicles — failure to do so could expose them to significant civil liability in the event of an accident.

Defendants Have a Duty to Properly Maintain Their Vehicles

In Arizona, all drivers have a duty to maintain their vehicles in a reasonably safe condition so as to minimize the risk of injury to others.  Ensuring that one’s vehicle is properly maintained and free of defective conditions (that could pose an injury risk) may require a wide range of active behaviors, such as regular inspections, professional servicing and repair, and more.

Whether the defendant has done enough to maintain their vehicle will depend on the circumstances of the case.  For example, if the defendant notices that their engine is acting up quite a bit, and they refuse to inspect the condition to determine whether the engine is faulty and in need of repair, then that may constitute negligence (if the engine fails and leads to a collision).

Knew or Reasonably Should Have Known

Critically, you can only hold a defendant-driver liable for the failure to adequately maintain their vehicle (in a safe condition) if you can prove that the defendant knew of the defective condition at-issue, or reasonably should have known about the defective condition.  Drivers must regularly inspect their vehicles, or have a professional do so on their behalf.  If a defective condition is obvious and should have been discovered during the inspection, but was not, then the defendant may still be held liable.  Of course, some defective conditions may become known (or reasonably should be known) even outside of the inspection context — for example, if a tire goes flat, then the driver should become aware of the defective condition, even if they have not performed an “inspection.”

Schedule a Free Consultation With an Experienced Phoenix Car Accident Lawyer

If you have been injured in a car accident due to the fault of another party, you may be entitled to recover significant damages pursuant to Arizona law — but litigation can often be quite complicated.  As such, we encourage you to get in touch with a seasoned team of attorneys who can aggressively represent your interests from beginning-to-end of litigation.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys have over six decades of combined experience advocating on behalf of car accident plaintiffs, including those involved in accidents where the collision occurred due to the defendant’s failure to adequately maintain their vehicle in a safe condition.  As a firm, we focus entirely on personal injury cases, so we are fully capable of handling “edge cases” and disputes where the defendant’s liability may be difficult to assess.

Call 602-535-1900 or submit an online claim form today to schedule a free and confidential consultation with an experienced Phoenix car accident lawyer at Hirsch & Lyon.  We will evaluate your case and — if the claims are worth pursuing — will work with you to develop a strategy for securing maximum compensation.

In Arizona, and all other state jurisdictions, the surviving family members (i.e., the surviving spouse, child, parent, guardian, siblings, grandparents, etc.) of the deceased may bring a wrongful death action against the defendant whose negligence or other misconduct caused the death of their loved one.

For example, if your loved one died in a car accident involving a defendant-driver who was intoxicated at the time of the accident, then you would likely be entitled to bring a wrongful death action for damages.

Wrongful death actions can give rise to significant damages.  Specifically, such actions are intended to compensate the surviving family members of the deceased for the losses they suffered due to the death of their loved one.  These losses are quite varied, and are certainly not limited to emotional losses — in fact, surviving family members may be entitled to recover for a range of damages that include lost financial support and lost companionship.

Wrongful Death Damages — Basics

Wrongful death claims can vary significantly from case-to-case, as the individual bringing the action may have a more interdependent relationship with the deceased (than others with a wrongful death claim).  For example, if you are completely financially dependent on your spouse, and your spouse dies in a car accident (involving the defendant’s negligence), then you would be entitled to wrongful death damages that account for the lost financial support that you would have otherwise received had your spouse survived.

Wrongful death damages include, but are not limited, to:

• Funeral, burial, and medical expenses that you expended on behalf of the deceased
• Financial support (pre-existing and projected future support)
• Domestic services and support
• Mental anguish
• Loss of companionship
• Loss of parental guidance
• Loss of love
• Loss of care
• Loss of consortium (i.e., marital relationship)
• And more

These damages can be somewhat difficult for first-time litigants to understand, let’s clarify with a quick example.

Suppose that your mother dies in a car accident where the defendant was driving negligently and is therefore responsible for your mother’s death.  As the child, you are entitled to bring a wrongful death action.

Before the accident, your relationship with your mother was highly dependent, and as such, the losses are substantial.  You lived with your mother in a shared family house, and she cooked, cleaned, and provided various other domestic services.  Perhaps she also provided supplementary financial support for your education.  You would likely be entitled to damages that include existing and future financial support, the value of the domestic services, loss of companionship, love, care, and parental guidance, and mental anguish.

Speak to a Skilled Phoenix Wrongful Death Attorney at Hirsch & Lyon for Assistance

If your loved one has died due to the negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct of another, then — in all likelihood — you are entitled to bring a wrongful death action against the liable defendant and secure damages for the losses you suffered as a result of your loved one’s death.  Arizona law entitles the qualified, surviving family members to a range of possible damages, depending on the circumstances.  Given the variation, we encourage family members to contact a seasoned team of attorneys for guidance.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys have over 65 years of combined experience handling car, truck, and motorcycle accident claims, including those that involve wrongful death — we are fully capable of representing claimants in complex wrongful death actions.  Further, we offer discounted contingency fee arrangements, so whatever you recover in the lawsuit (whether through a negotiated settlement with the defendant, or a favorable verdict), we take a lower percentage.

If you’d like to learn more about your claims and speak to a qualified professional about how best to proceed with your wrongful death action, call 602-535-1900 or submit an online claim form through our website to schedule a free and confidential consultation with an experienced Phoenix wrongful death attorney today.  We look forward to assisting you.

If you’ve been involved in an Arizona car accident, then you may not only be entitled to bring an action against the defendant for damages related to your injuries, but you may also be entitled to claim property loss as a component of your overall damages.  In fact, many plaintiffs are unaware that their injury claim may include a purely economic, property loss component, and are surprised to learn that those damages can be significant, depending on the overall circumstances.

The Basics of Property Loss in the Context of Car Accidents

In any injury lawsuit, there are both economic and non-economic damages.  Economic damages are objectively measurable and related to specific financial losses.  Non-economic damages, by contrast, are subjective in nature and are somewhat more speculative than economic damages.  Property loss claims fall within the category of economic damages, and are quite commonly encountered in the car accident context.

Suppose, for example, that you suffer serious injuries in a car accident — more specifically, you have suffered debilitating back and shoulder injuries, for which you have had to see many medical specialists and have had to undergo surgery.  Naturally, you would be entitled to assert damages for pain and suffering, medical expenses, emotional distress, wage loss, and various other losses.

You would also be entitled to fold your property loss into your overall damage claim.  If your car was totaled in the accident, then you might be entitled to recover the full value of the vehicle at the time of the accident, as well as the cost of a rental car for the interim period.  Alternatively, if you have had to get significant repair work done, you might be entitled to secure damages for the repair costs.

What many plaintiffs don’t realize, however, is that — even if they have paid for a perfect repair of the car — there is an additional damage claim known as “diminution in value” for which they may recover.

What is Diminution in Value?

The “diminution in value” claim is quite unique in that it accounts for a psychological trend among consumers that causes vehicles with an accident history — even if they are in absolutely perfect condition — to have a reduced resale value.  Thus, any fairly contemplated award of damages must account for the eventual, diminished value of the vehicle.

How is Diminished Value Calculated?

The diminished value of your vehicle will be determined on the basis of a variety of different factors, including, but not necessarily limited, to:

• Age of the vehicle in question
• Model of the vehicle
• Brand
• Mileage
• Condition before and after the accident
• Extent of damage vehicle suffered during accident
• Quality of repairs
• Objective value of vehicle before the accident
• Difficulty of reselling activities after the accident
• Presence of interested buyers

These factors are all dispositive, but you’ll have to introduce expert testimony that puts hard numerical estimates on the pre-accident and post-accident value of your vehicle.  Your attorney will have specific experts on-hand who can be trusted to provide an accurate evaluation.

Contact a Qualified Phoenix Accident Attorney for Guidance on Your Claims

In Arizona, and all other states, injured plaintiffs may assert damages for the economic losses they sustain to their vehicle.  These claims are not necessarily simple, however.  You’ll want to work with a qualified attorney who is intimately familiar with the process of securing damages for both economic and non-economic injuries.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our team of attorneys boast decades of experience providing skilled legal advocacy to injured plaintiffs in Arizona.  Unlike many other injury firms, we are focused on personal injury cases and as such, we are particularly well-suited to litigate these disputes to the fullest extent.  We also offer discounted contingency fees that ensure that our clients can keep more of what they receive in damages.

Interested in learning more?  Call 602-535-1900 or submit a case evaluation form today to schedule a free consultation with an experienced Phoenix accident attorney here at Hirsch & Lyon.  During the initial consultation, we will assess your claims and determine the best way to move forward to secure maximum compensation.

In the majority of motor vehicle accident lawsuits, injury victims initially focus their attention on obvious defendants — other negligent drivers who contributed to the accident, or perhaps the government agency that failed to maintain the roadway in a reasonably safe condition.  In reality, however, the vehicle manufacturer may be a potentially liable defendant worth bringing an action against, depending on the circumstances.

All product manufacturers — in Arizona and elsewhere — have a duty to ensure that their products are not defective and are reasonably safe for their foreseeable uses.  Failure to adhere to this duty could expose the manufacturer to significant liability.  This could prove especially useful in cases where the other defendants (i.e., the drivers) are uninsured or underinsured and therefore not equipped to cover your damages in full.

There are a number of different product liability claims — defective manufacture, defective design, failure to warn, and breach of warranty — but for now, let’s focus on defective design in the motor vehicle accident context.

Defective Design Liability

Arizona implements strict product liability, which is a boon for injured plaintiffs involved in litigation with a vehicle manufacturer.  Stated simply, the plaintiff need only prove that the vehicle is defective in some way, and that the defect substantially contributed to the injuries they suffered in the accident.  It is not necessary for the plaintiff to prove the manufacturer’s negligence.

Of course, this does not mean that litigation is easy.  Arguably, the implementation of strict liability simply puts the injury victims and manufacturers on a more equal footing, given the substantial advantages that manufacturers enjoy from a resources perspective.

In any case, if you’re looking to bring a claim against the vehicle manufacturer for defective design in Arizona, you’ll have to prove the following elements:

1. Some element of the vehicle was defective; and
2. The defective condition proximately caused you injuries.

Success will ultimately turn on your ability to prove that the product was actually defective in terms of its design.  This can be a significant challenge, particularly if the defendant is uncooperative or hostile and is willing to throw resources at the problem in an effort to bully you into submission.

Arizona courts will consider a product defective in terms of its design if the product poses an unreasonable danger to foreseeable users.  There are two tests for determining whether a product poses an “unreasonable” danger to its users: the risk-benefit test and the consumer expectation test.

Risk-Benefit Test

The risk-benefit test is fairly straightforward on the surface.  In Arizona, the courts will deem a product defective if the harmful consequences of its design outweigh the benefits of its design.  Courts will weigh a number of different factors, including the existence of a reasonable alternative design, the actual danger of the design, and many others.

Consumer Expectation Test

The consumer expectation test, by contrast, is about “foreseeability.”  If a product is not as safe to use in a foreseeable manner (i.e., driving a car on a highway) as the ordinary consumer would expect, then it will be deemed defective.

Product Misuse as a Defense

Manufacturers have a number of defenses they can assert to circumvent liability, including the product misuse defense.  Naturally, manufacturers are not absolute guarantors of safety for every conceivable use of their product — for example, a vacuum cleaner manufacturer cannot be held liable if a consumer attempts to use the vacuum to clean up toxic chemical waste and complains that it leaked out and caused them to suffer injuries.

Similarly, there are plenty of ways in which a driver may misuse a vehicle in a non-foreseeable manner.  For example, if you attach a pulley to your truck tires, and run the engine to turn the wheels and lift an object out of a pit, then the manufacturer cannot be held liable for injuries stemming from some product failure that subsequently occurs (i.e., the breaks fail and the truck collides with you and your friends).

Speak to an Experienced Phoenix Accident Attorney for Legal Assistance

Though product defect claims in Arizona are subject to strict liability principles, they are among the most difficult claims to “win,” as manufacturers have substantial resources, and tend to be somewhat aggressive in fighting lawsuits so as to discourage others from bringing similar lawsuits.

Here at Hirsch & Lyon, our attorneys are more than capable of taking on manufacturers and securing maximum compensation for our injured clients.  We have decades of experience representing the injured in a range of motor vehicle accident lawsuits, and as such, we understand the contours of product defect litigation and the strategies that manufacturers employ to avoid liability.

Unlike many other firms, we focus solely on personal injury cases.  This focus ensures that we are well-equipped to handle all the complex (and unexpected!) issues that arise in such litigation.  Our results speak volumes about our approach — we have secured over $100 million in damages (verdicts and settlements) on behalf of our injured clients.

Call 602-535-1900 to connect to an experienced Phoenix accident attorney today for a free and confidential consultation.