When you sustain injuries because someone else acted negligently, you may have grounds for a personal injury case. In this type of lawsuit, you’re essentially making a claim that the other party failed to meet their duty of care towards you, which resulted in your injuries. But what exactly is meant by "duty of care?" And how is it determined whether the other party failed to meet that duty? In this article, we’ll explain the standard of care in a personal injury case.
Table of Contents
Duty of Care Defined
In any personal injury case, the plaintiff (the party bringing the lawsuit) is tasked with proving that the defendant (the party being sued) had a legal duty to act in a certain way, and that they breached that duty. The legal duty in question is often referred to as the "duty of care." Let’s take a closer look at what that means.
In general, people have an obligation to act in a way that avoids causing harm to others. This might mean, for example, driving at a safe speed, obeying traffic signals, and keeping a reasonable distance from other vehicles. If someone fails to uphold this obligation and causes an accident, they may be held liable for any resulting harm.
Specifically, the duty of care refers to the legal obligation that individuals have to exercise a reasonable degree of care in situations where another person could be injured. This duty of care extends to a wide range of situations, including driving on the roadways, maintaining property, providing medical care, and more.
Determining Whether the Duty of Care Was Breached
Once it has been established that a duty of care existed in a given scenario, the next step is to determine whether the defendant breached that duty. To do this, the court will typically consider the following factors:
Reasonable Person Standard
One way to assess whether the defendant met their duty of care is by using the "reasonable person standard." This standard asks whether a hypothetical reasonable person would have acted differently in the same situation. For example, if a driver runs a red light and causes an accident, a court might evaluate whether a reasonable person would have stopped at the light.
Specific Standards
In some situations, a specific standard of care might be applied. For example, doctors are held to a certain level of medical care, referred to as the "standard of care for their specialty." If a doctor fails to meet this standard, they could be deemed negligent in a medical malpractice case.
Circumstantial Evidence
In other cases, the defendant’s breach of duty might be proven through circumstantial evidence. For example, if a customer slips and falls in a grocery store aisle that has just been mopped, it may be inferred that the store failed to place warning signs or barriers near the wet area.
Negligence and Gross Negligence
In a personal injury case, there are two types of liability: negligence and gross negligence. Negligence refers to a failure to exercise the necessary degree of care to prevent harm, while gross negligence refers to a wanton disregard for the safety of others. Gross negligence is a higher standard of liability; it is a more serious degree of recklessness than negligence.
Conclusion
The standard of care is a fundamental concept in personal injury cases. It dictates that individuals have an obligation to act in a way that avoids causing harm to others and establishes a legal duty of care. Proving a breach of that duty – and whether negligence or gross negligence was at play – is necessary to win a personal injury case. With the right legal counsel and a solid case, you can recover compensation for any injuries you’ve suffered.