South Florida Personal Injury Attorney

Florida Personal Injury Lawyers, Florida Personal Injury Attorneys

David I. Fuchs and Florida Personal Injury Lawyers have over 17 years of experience in successfully representing accident victims, their families and friends who have suffered a death in the family or sustained serious bodily injuries, pain and suffering, lost wages and medical bills because of the negligence of a third party whether it be another driver in a car, automobile, truck, pedestrian, bicycle, motorcycle, tractor trailer, moped, scooter, or skateboard accident, or whether the serious injury has occurred on, in or a result of a bus accident, medical malpractice, nursing home, airplane, boat, construction site, cruise ship, railroad or railway, swimming pool, dog or animal bite, defective product. David I. Fuchs and Florida Personal Injury Lawyers will also fight for you if you have been seriously injured and hurt by virtue of a slip and fall or other accident on the property of a third party due to the negligence of the owner of property whether that property be a private home, apartment or condo, shopping mall, strip mall, shopping center, department store, supermarket, gas station, public sidewalk, street or pathway, park or recreation center, convenience store, or any other public, government or private property.  

Personal injury litigation is one of the few areas of the law where even the poor have equal access to justice. The reason for this is the contingency fee agreement.  The fee a client will pay will ordinarily be a percentage of the total amount of any recovery in their claim, whether by settlement, jury verdict or some other alternative dispute resolution procedure. The "contingent" aspect of the fee means that if there is no recovery, there is no attorney fee. The contingent fee is to be distinguished from expenses, which ordinarily remain an obligation of the client, although in many cases the attorney will advance expenses during the time the case is pending and will deduct the expenses from the client's share of any recovery at the conclusion of the case.

There are a number of advantages to this type of fee arrangement, the most obvious of which is the absence of a risk of owing the attorney a fee when there has been no recovery.

Another important advantage of this type of fee arrangement is the security the client should feel at knowing that the attorney has cast his/her fate along side that of the client. The fact that the attorney is willing to handle a client's case on a contingent fee basis is a reflection that the attorney has a degree of confidence in his/her ability to obtain a recovery in the case, because attorneys, like other professionals, don't generally work for free and cannot ordinarily afford to become involved in cases which they feel are unlikely to produce a fee commensurate to the work they expect to perform.

A final advantage of the contingent fee agreement is the motivation it provides to the attorney to maximize the client's recovery. In other types of litigation where clients pay the attorney by the hour for their time, it makes little economic difference to the attorney whether the client has a successful outcome to the litigation. In contingent fee cases the attorney's own recovery is tied to the result obtained for the client, so it is important to the attorney to put in the time and effort necessary to bring about the greatest recovery in the case.

The percentage to be charged on a contingent fee case, to a large extent, depends on the type of case. In automobile accident cases a contingent fee of 1/3 of the recovery is common. Medical malpractice cases, product liability cases and other more complex personal injury litigations in some jurisdictions often are handled on a higher percentage basis, because they frequently consume substantially greater amounts of attorney time and resources. Attorneys frequently advance many thousands of dollars in expenses, including expert witness fees, in the more complex personal injury litigation. It is not unusual in some of these cases for expert witness fees to exceed $20,000.00 to $30,000.00. Workers' compensation and Social Security Disability attorney fees are generally regulated by the agencies administering the law and often are somewhat less than in other areas of personal injury litigation. Depending on the type of case, some attorneys may charge a lower percentage on a contingent fee if the case is settled before suit is filed, more if the case is concluded after trial has begun or more if an appeal is necessary.

In a personal injury case one party is generally asserting that a third party's negligence was the cause of their accident and resulting injuries and other damages. In general terms, negligence is "the failure to use ordinary care" through either an act or omission. That is, negligence occurs when:

• somebody does not exercise the amount of care that a reasonably careful person would use under the circumstances; or
• somebody does something that a reasonably careful person would not do under the circumstances.

Negligence is often claimed in personal injury lawsuits. For example, a personal injury lawsuit arising out of an automobile accident case or premises liability action is frequently based on the theory that the defendant was negligent. Please note that negligence law varies between jurisdictions, sometimes significantly, and you should check with a local legal professional if you wish to know the specific negligence laws of your jurisdiction.

Proximate Cause

Proximate cause exists where the plaintiff is injured as the result of negligent conduct, and plaintiff's injury must have been a natural and probable result of the negligent conduct. In order for a defendant to be liable, the plaintiff must establish both negligence and proximate cause.

Please note that the law speaks of the defendant's conduct as being "a proximate cause" of an accident, as opposed to "the proximate cause". Many accidents have more than one proximate cause. It is typically not necessary for liability that the defendant's negligence be either the only proximate cause of an injury, or the last proximate cause. A defendant may be liable even where an injury has multiple proximate causes, and whether those causes occur at the same time or in combination. A plaintiff may be able to bring a cause of action against two or more defendants by proving that the acts of each were proximate causes of the plaintiff's injury, even where the defendants' negligent acts were distinct.

Imagine a situation where a plaintiff is driving down the road, and is suddenly cut off by a person who runs through a stop sign on a side street. The plaintiff slams on her brakes, and is able to avoid striking that car. However, the plaintiff is rear-ended by another driver who was not paying attention to the events in front of his car. The plaintiff may be able to bring an action against both drivers - the one who cut her off and the one who rear-ended her - on the basis that their negligent acts, although independent, were both proximate causes of her injuries.

The Elements of a Negligence Action

A typical formula for evaluating negligence requires that a plaintiff prove the following four factors by a "preponderance of the evidence":

1. The defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff (or a duty to the general public, including the plaintiff);
2. The defendant violated that duty;
3. As a result of the defendant's violation of that duty, the plaintiff suffered injury; and
4. The injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant's action or inaction.

For example, a person driving a car has a general duty to conduct the car in a safe and responsible manner. If a driver runs through a red light, the driver violates that duty. As it is foreseeable that running a red light can result in a car crash, and that people are likely to be injured in such a collision, the driver will be liable in negligence for any injuries that in fact result to others in a collision resulting from the running of the red light.

Gross Negligence

Gross negligence means conduct or a failure to act that is so reckless that it demonstrates a substantial lack of concern for whether an injury will result. It is sometimes necessary to establish "gross negligence" as opposed to "ordinary negligence" in order to overcome a legal impediment to a lawsuit. For example, a government employee who is on the job may be immune from liability for ordinary negligence, but may remain liable for gross negligence.

Similarly, where a plaintiff signs a release (as may be required, for example, before entering a sports competition), for public policy reasons many jurisdictions will apply the release only to conduct which constitutes "ordinary negligence" and not to acts of "gross negligence". The reason for this is quite simple: It is not good public policy to allow a defendant to escape liability for reckless indifference to the safety of others, particularly in contexts where the defendant is responsible for creating unsafe conditions, or is profiting from their existence. Consider, for example, a commercial venture engaged in a high risk recreational activity, such as a company that offers rock climbing tours. If a tour member is injured when safety equipment provided by the company unexpectedly fails, a valid release may protect the company from a lawsuit. However, if the company knows up front that the equipment is defective and uses it anyway, it would not be protected by the release.

Children and Negligence

Minors are typically held to a different standard of care than adults. For example, a minor's negligence may be evaluated against what reasonably careful person of the same age, mental capacity and experience would exercise under the same or similar circumstances. Very young minors (e.g., minors under the age of seven) are typically presumed to be incapable of negligence.

Most jurisdictions also consider the fact that minors act upon childish instincts and impulses when considering injuries to minors. As a consequence, a defendant knew or should have known that a child (or children) were present, or were likely to be present, in the vicinity, the defendant may required to exercise greater vigilance. By way of example, a person driving by an unfenced playground where children often play baseball should be on alert that a child may impulsively chase a ball into the street.

Comparative Negligence

When comparative negligence applies, the damages a plaintiff is awarded will be reduced in proportion with the plaintiff's fault for his own injuries. (e.g., a jury determines a plaintiff's damages to be $100,000.00, and finds that the plaintiff is 40% at fault. The plaintiff would thus be awarded $60,000 against the defendant.)

Contributory Negligence

Where "contributory negligence" principles are applied, if the plaintiff in any way contributed to his or her own injury, the plaintiff is barred from recovering damages. The extreme consequence of this approach has led to its being limited or abandoned in many jurisdictions.

One historic limitation has been to examine the context of an accident to determine who had the "last clear chance" to avoid its occurrence, and to excuse a plaintiff's contributory negligence where the defendant is found to have had and to have failed to exercise that "last clear chance".

Mixed Comparative and Contributory Negligence

Some states follow a mixture of comparative and contributory negligence, whereby a plaintiff who is less than fifty percent at fault may recover damages reduced by the plaintiff's proportion of fault, but a plaintiff who is more than fifty percent at fault may not recover damages, or may recover only a percentage of economic damages, against the defendants.

Vicarious liability occurs when one person is held responsible for the negligence of another. Typically, this applies in an employment context, where the employer (master) is responsible for the negligent acts of the employee (servant) which occur within the context of the employment relationship. For example, an employer may be liable for an accident caused by an employee as the result of the negligent operation of a delivery vehicle.

Often, parents may be held vicariously liable for the negligent acts of their children. However, many jurisdictions have limited the vicarious liability of parents, and some have eliminated it.

David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers will represent you for injuries that include, but are not limited to:

I) Injuries requiring surgery, sutures, staples

2) Traumatic Brain Injury, including those caused by oxygen deprivation

3) Severe burns resulting in significant and permanent scarring

4) Mental anguish and emotional distress, death

5) Those injuries caused by a collision with a driver that is drunk, impaired or otherwise under the influence of narcotics or drugs.

After a collision or other accident caused by the negligence of another it is imperative to call the police to the accident scene, and seek immediate medical treatment. It is then important to seek legal counsel to protect your legal rights by calling attorney David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers who will take your call and speak with you immediately about your car accident. Attorney David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers will then stand ready to fight for you to see that you get compensation for your pain and suffering, any lost wages and medical bills. 

Call attorney David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers Toll Free at 800-570-2858 for a free consultation to discuss your accident case. You may also write to attorney David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers by filling out the form on the "Contact Us" page."

If you can not come to us attorney David I. Fuchs and Florida personal injury lawyers will send a representative to see you.  We speak English and Spanish. Se habla ingles y espanol. 

Llame David Fuchs Florida abogado de heridas.