- March 19, 2020
- Posted by: Robert Katz
- Category: Personal Injury
Individuals injured in an accident they believe was due to the negligence or malfeasance of another party often seek to recover compensation for damages like pain, associated medical expenses and lost work time through a legal action known as a civil suit.
For the plaintiff, said action could have several outcomes. If the proceedings lead to a trial, an adjudicating body could award them all of the damages they sought, partial damages or none at all. However, another potential option is to accept a settlement. Katz Injury Law, which serves the residents of the Philadelphia suburbs, can help you understand the circumstances under which agreeing to a settlement might prove beneficial.
As the word implies, a settlement is a legal agreement in which the accused party or an insurance company offers a specific monetary amount to the plaintiff with designs on ending the civil dispute in question. In many instances, said amount will be less than the plaintiff seeks but may still be a significant bit of money.
Reasons To Accept A Settlement
There are certain notable reasons why a settlement might be worth considering, such as:
The Case Is Complicated
Your case might contain a significant degree of information to sort through or have multiple disputing parties. Under such circumstances, legal proceedings could last for extended durations. Said event could prove costly in terms of legal bills or merely in regards to needing funds to return to some semblance of normalcy. In such instances, a settlement might better serve your needs.
The Plaintiff Might Bear Some Responsibility
Very few cases are completely cut and dried with all associated facts proving the accused party or parties were 100 percent to blame and the plaintiff bared no responsibility whatsoever. Before any compensation is awarded, an adjudicating body like a judge or jury must first determine fault.
Modified Comparative Negligence
The State of Pennsylvania adheres to a civil principle called modified comparative negligence. In accordance with this mandate, an adjudicating body can assign the plaintiff a certain percentage of blame. The percentage the plaintiff is assigned will reduce their total compensation by that amount. For example, if said party was held 25 percent liable and initially sued for $100,000 in damages, they would only recoup $75,000. Furthermore, should the suing entity be found more than 50 percent at fault, they may receive no compensation at all.
If you were involved in an accident and sustained injuries, please contact Katz Injury Law. We can review your case and may be able to help you secure a financial reward.