North Carolina Car Accident – Uncovering “Hidden” Defendants
If you have been recently a victim in a North Carolina car accident, and you suffered an injury such as whiplash, broken bones, lacerations, head injuries, or worse, you and your family likely want to hold the negligent or careless party accountable to the law and potentially bring a lawsuit against him, her, or a company or an insurer. The money that you win in a North Carolina car accident settlement or verdict can prove crucial to pay for things like your surgical bills, rehabilitation, medical care, lost wages, therapy, job training, legal fees, and much more.
But many defendants make the mistake of thinking that their version of the accident is “right” and that all their North Carolina car accident law firm must do is “prove” their position. In fact, your law firm will deeply investigate the cause of the accident and potentially uncover evidence that you simply were not aware of. This evidence could highlight other responsible parties — a huge boon for plaintiffs, especially if the person who hit you lacked insurance to pay for your extensive damages and medical bills.
Here are two examples to illustrate the point:
1. A trucker high on methamphetamine drives too fast and knocks your car off I-95 into a ditch.
You suffer sprains, broken bones, and a contusion. After you recover, you want to sue the truck driver. The negligent methamphetamine addled driver likely should be liable. But a hidden defendant might be the trucker’s company – maybe the company failed to do an adequate background check before they hired the driver? In this case, not only might the driver be liable but the company who hired him might also be liable for your cost.
2. You’re driving in a rural area near Ashton when a teenager yapping on a cell phone rear-ends you and gives you a massive case of whiplash, which forces you to undergo months and months of soft tissue therapy, physical therapy, and possibly even surgery.
The teenage driver might be liable, of course, but a hidden defendant might be the manufacturer of the brakes in the teen’s car. In other words, perhaps the teenager actually tried to slam on her brakes, but the car did not respond effectively; and ultimately the reason for this failure had to do with an engineering flaw in her car’s braking system. This fact may not exonerate her from having to pay for your medical bills, etc, but it might rope in another party – the manufacturer/designer of the braking system – and pave the way for you to recover significant damages.
More Web Resources:
Hidden complexity
looking deeper into problems
