Single Blog Title

This is a single blog caption

How The Thin Skull Rule Gets Applied To Personal Injury Cases?

The law makes clear the fact that someone with a stable medical condition cannot be held responsible for injuries sustained during an accident. That declaration, known as the thin skull rule seeks to keep defendants from using a plaintiff’s pre-existing condition as a cover for the defendants’ own negligent behavior.

What the thin skull rule says to those representing an insurance company in a personal injury case?

The insurance company cannot claim that the victim’s injuries were more severe than expected. The insurance company cannot claim that the victim should have been wearing some special type of protective device.

However, if the insurance company were to learn that the victim was dealing with a destabilized medical condition, then it could act according to the crumbling skull rule. That states that someone with an unstable medical condition can seek compensation for only any added harm, as may have been caused by the accident. That reduces the amount of blame on the responsible party.

How can a victim with a pre-existing condition prove the stable state of that condition before the accident?

That proof must be found in medical records. Those records made prior to the accident must be compared with the results of a post-accident evaluation. Ideally, the injured victim can hire a lawyer, a member of the legal profession that knows how to work with members of the medical profession.

A good Car Accident Lawyer in Waterloo would make use of any contact with members of the medical profession, in order to seek confirmation of any claims made by the other party’s insurance company. As stated above, the insurer’s representative should not insist that a victim with a stable medical condition ought to make use of a special protective device.

An attorney ought to be able to consult with a physician, regarding the soundness of such an argument. With the support of someone in the medical profession, a lawyer should be able to fight any wild, unfounded claims that might have been made by the other party’s insurance company.

Summing up a comparison of the 2 rules (thin and crumbling skull):

Someone who’s negligence has caused an accident cannot claim that a victim with a stable medical condition could was partially responsible of his or her injuries. On the other hand, someone with an unstable medical condition would have to accept a portion of the blame for any injuries. He or she had assumed a certain degree of risk by acting in the same manner as someone without such a condition.

A good lawyer should be familiar with both rules. That attorney should not suggest that a healthy client invited problems by failing to wear some sort of imagined protective device. Personal injury lawyers should deal with facts, and not with dreamed-up ideas.