Insurers put great effort into uncovering the facts about any claimant’s previous accidents, and the injuries sustained as a result of that same accident. Yet no insurance company can alter the court’s goal.
What is the court’s objective?
The court wants to return the plaintiff to his or her original position.
What questions does the court ask, as it determines how to go after its objective?
• Is this a thin-skulled plaintiff?
• Does the plaintiff have a crumbling skull?
Consequences to the answers for the above questions:
The plaintiff with a thin skull is more susceptible to injuries that than the average person. Consequently, the defendant can be held liable for any injuries suffered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff with the crumbling skull would have suffered injuries in any event. For that reason, the defendant is not liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. The legal system establishes the time and conditions under which the crumbling skull rule gets applied.
Provisions in the crumbling skull rule apply to psychological issues, as well as to physical problems. In other words, if someone developed psychological problems following an earlier accident, the same person could not claim development of psychological issues, as the result of a second accident.
On the other hand, the expected injuries might develop on a body part that is different from the body part that got injured during the second accident. As a result, the defendant may not be able to escape responsibility for the new injuries.
The lawyer’s duty
The lawyer should take the time to learn as much as possible about a client’s past and existing injuries. A Personal Injury Lawyer in St. Albert might want to consult with a medical expert. That approach should make it harder for the defense team to make some type of unfounded claim.
If a client’s lawyer does not realize that a given client has a thin skull, as opposed to a crumbling skull, then he or she might feel swayed by statements from the defense team. That fact highlights the reason that accident victims must be careful, when selecting a lawyer. Good lawyers have access to members of the medical community, and make use of that access. They seek out information on a case that has been mentioned in a client’s medical history.
In the absence of such information, a plaintiff’s lawyer might get an unfounded challenge from the defense team. Lawyers that feel ready to accept such a challenge put their clients at a distinct disadvantage. That is why it pays to have a lawyer that does not shrink from putting forth some extra effort. How does a client benefit from that extra effort? The client’s attorney can distinguish a crumbling skull from a thin one.