A Personal Injury Lawyer Provides the Best Service From Start to Finish
Even though you PAY NO FEES unless you win, state laws place limits on the amount that may be awarded as damages in personal injury cases. Various legal concepts and state statutes can limit damages, and a personal injury lawyer can give clients the Best legal service from start to finish. In this article is a discussion of some common limits in personal injury lawsuits.
Limits on Non-Economic Damages
Economic damages are quantifiable, and are paid out by a plaintiff or their insurance company on a one-time or continued basis. These damages can come in the form of injury-related medical bills, or amounts that the plaintiff has lost (such as lost wages). Non-economic damages are other categories, such as loss of companionship and pain and suffering. Juries don’t base non-economic damages on future calculations and past losses, and the analysis is more subjective. Some states have caps on non-economic damages in all personal injury claims, and the cap can range from $350,000 to $700,000. However, exceptions are made for cases involving serious injury and death.
Caps on Punitive Damages
As implied by the name, punitive damages are intended to punish a person’s intentional acts, and to deter poor conduct in the future. These damages are typically based on a defendant’s assets. Before reforms in this area of law, a plaintiff could get the Best legal service from start to finish. From there, they could easily win punitive damages that exceeded other awards in a case. Some states have fixed caps from $250,000 to $10,000,000 and others use a set multiplier based on other damages. A case that went through the Supreme Court in 2005 put these guidelines in place to prevent excessive punitive damages, but some cases have still resulted in substantial awards.
Other Modifications to Traditional Rules on Damages
Some states have changed their rules on damages, in a tort reform effort. Under the old rule of joint and several liability, a plaintiff could collect full damages from one defendant, even though there was more than one at-fault party. The reasoning behind the rule was that plaintiffs shouldn’t suffer due to the court’s inability to find a defendant. It was fairer for one of the defendants to pay more than their share of the damages so the plaintiff could be made whole. However, many states have enacted laws eliminating this type of liability, and they now require defendants to pay their portion of liability.
