f I sue them in small claims should I sue just the main contractor or should I sue the main contractor and their subs?
info: I hit a pot hole in a construction zone that was unmarked and un protected. It was a county project. I have evidence to prove they knew about the pot hole and the construction company caused the hole to re-open with their equipment. However, they are both denying my claim. The construction company had sub-contractors milling the road. Do I sue the county and the main construction company or do I sue everyone that I know stepped foot on the grounds (i.e. water companies, sub contractors, etc.)? Or, should the main construction company and the county be good enough?
What are the odds they will settle out of court?
If my odds are good that the ins. company will settle then I was thinking of not naming the county in the suit becasue it complicates things. I can not go to small claims court with the county, etc. What are your reccomendations I was not injured. The property claim is valued at $950.00
Did you sustain a serous injury as a result of hitting the pot hole? If so, I recommend contacting an experience Construction site injury lawyer who could further examine the facts and help you determine your next best course of action.
Personal Injury Lawyer
Since you said you are not injured and you sustained property damage of less than $1000, I would try to settle the claim yourself. If you use a lawyer you will wind up not getting much money in your pocket. I don't know many lawyers who would take a case like this without an injury being involved.
It is doubtful that any attorney would assist you on a $950 property damage claim. If you have comprehensive coverage on your vehicle, I suggest that you process this claim through your own carrier. Failing that, your option will be to sue the responsible parties in the appropriate court in your jurisdiction.
Mr. Lundeen is licensed to practice law in Florida and Vermont. The response herein is not legal advice and does not create an attorney/client relationship. The response is in the form of legal education and is intended to provide general information about the matter within the question. Oftentimes the question does not include significant and important facts and timelines that, if known, could significantly change the reply and make it unsuitable. Mr. Lundeen strongly advises the questioner to confer with an attorney in your state in order to insure proper advice is received.