A court might award punitive damages, if a defendant in a personal injury case has displayed behavior that went beyond the category of simple negligence. In fact, the defendant’s outrageous actions could be likened to acts that exemplified gross negligence.
This particular monetary award does not serve as a form of compensation for the plaintiff.
• It gives the court a way to punish the defendant.
• It represents an attempt to reduce the likelihood that the defendant’s outrageous actions might be repeated.
What situations could push a court to impose punitive damages?
In some states, it would be those situations where defendants have carried out some form of intentional misconduct. In other states, it might be restricted to actions that were reckless or deceitful. Usually, such actions have been motivated by malice. In a majority of states, defendants that get charged with gross negligence also get hit with the need to pay punitive damages.
What is the nature of gross negligence?
According to the law, an act gets classed as grossly negligent if it shows disrespect for the safety of others. Typically, such disrespectful actions tend to be performed in a reckless manner. Frequently, the person that has chosen to act so recklessly has also ignored a specific law or regulation.
Why is gross negligence of particular concern to personal injury lawyers?
Facilities that provide customers with the chance to enjoy a daring or risky experience normally ask each customer to sign a waiver. That waiver would remove the facility from liability, if the signing customer were to get injured, while enjoying that daring experience. In other words, the facility cannot be sued for an injury that was suffered by a waiver-signing customer.
At the time of a personal injury case, that rule applies, unless the named facility has been grossly negligent. In that case, the signed waiver could not function as a means for lifting the liability charge that would otherwise get placed on the responsible facility/the waiver-creators.
What sorts of injuries to a customer that has carried out a risky action could be linked to gross negligence? Those would be injuries that were caused by a failure that had introduced into the situation more than the usual amount of risk. For example, suppose some customer chose to try the new game, the hatchet throw. There the sharp blade poses a risk. Suppose, though, that the customer got injured, because the grip on the hatchet failed to carry out its intended function.
In that case, the customer would have the right to hire a Personal Injury Lawyer in Waterloo and sue the hatchet-throwing facility. It, in turn, would have the right to sue the company that had produced and sold the defective hatchet.