i.e.: severe weight loss, anemia, thyroid problems, hormonal problems, depression (all documented)
i would have to prove that defendant's actions triggered mental and physical changes
Histories ( Dates listed in descending order)
08/01/2011 RESPONSE FILED
06/10/2011 SUMMONS FILED.
06/10/2011 FEE WAIVER FILED
06/02/2011 A/C - COMPLAINT FILED
05/31/2011 CMR CLERK'S CERT OF SERVICE MAILED TO RESPECTIVE PARTIES/COUNSEL
05/27/2011 COMPLAINT FILED
05/27/2011 NON-APP CASE MGMT REVIEW SCHEDULED FOR 11/14/11, IN DEPT 77
05/27/2011 A/C - FEE WAIVER
05/27/2011 FEE WAIVER FILED
In a personal injury case, you have to prove liability, causation and damages. You've only described the psychological damages.There are certainly cases involving psychological damages that are quite convincing, but juries are understandably hard to convince about such for any number of reasons. Given such a general and incomplete question, here is a very general answer. It is easiest to prove up physical damages that are obvious and can be seen, like a broken bone. It is harder to prove up physical damages that can't be seen, like soft tissue back injuries, which may show up on a radiological study. It is even harder to prove up psychological damages that can't be seen.Only their consequences can be seen, and it's easy to argue that such problems are pre-exisiting or exaggerated or temporary or some combination of all those. Presumably there are some physical damages, too. If there are psychological changes following a very serious incident like an explosion, it's easier to persuade the jury that they are real than if the changes follow, say, a slip on ice or a low impact auto crash. Good luck with your case. I hope you have an excellent lawyer.
I write only to add to Mr. Brophy's excellent answer, particularly in his admonition that you need a skilled lawyer. Insurance companies who typically call the defense shots in personal injury actions are very skeptical and hard-lined in cases involving claims of psychological damage. They tend to see these cases as potential windfalls for opportunistic plaintiffs who want to attribute all of their problems to the alleged cause. They tend to fight these cases very aggressively without even the usual minimal constraints of considerations of cost-effectiveness and business practicalities. You really really need an good lawyer.
Get free answers from experienced attorneys.
27,016 answers this week
2,948 attorneys answering
Don't speak legalese? We define thousands of terms in plain English.Browse our legal dictionary