Normally, after you file a personal injury lawsuit, you focus on how someone has forced you to deal with unexpected damage. In your mind you make a case that matches with your story. In your mind’s eye, you tend to forget that every argument can be viewed from two sides.
Consequently, you do not pay much attention to how your argument might play in court. Still, when two lawyers face each other in a courtroom, the two of them present the opposing sides of a given argument. Hence, your chances for coming out as the winner in your lawsuit will increase if you take the time to consider in what way you might be viewed as the one to blame.
In a courtroom, the defense lawyer will speak for the person that you say is at fault. That same Injury Lawyer in Cornwall will form an argument, with hopes of having the members of the jury think that you are at least partly to blame. If you understand that lawyer’s strategies, you can do a better job of countering them.
Strategies that focus on the role of the injured party
The lawyer might argue that you, the injured party willingly participated in a risky activity. That is a good argument if the harm inflicted on you related closely to the risk inherent in your chosen activity. If the lawyer can convince the jury that he or she has presented a valid argument, you could be charged with comparative negligence. That would mean that you had been declared partly at fault.
In a few states, a defense lawyer might seek to prove that you should be charged with contributory negligence. That would mean that any proof that you bore any degree of responsibility would cancel your chances for obtaining the desired compensation. Fortunately, only a few states allow a defense lawyer to introduce evidence of contributory negligence.
A lawyer might try to weaken your case by showing that your lawsuit fails to state an explicit claim. In other words, that lawyer would argue that no link exists between the defendant’s actions and the injuries of the plaintiff (your injuries). Finally, a lawyer could present evidence that seemed to show failure on your part to mitigate damages. In other words, if you were injured, you took part in activities that worsened the nature of the injury. Alternately, when you could not go back to your old job, you turned down a job offer, so that you could look unemployable.
Strategies that focus on courtroom procedures
Objecting to questions asked of the defendants is also allowed. If a lawyer for the defendant objects to a line of questioning and the judge allows that same line of questioning to continue, then the defense lawyer has grounds for appealing the decision.