The Parts of a Motor Vehicle Accident Case

Being involved in a motor vehicle accident is a necessary but not a sufficient basis in the eyes of New York State Law to get the right to be made whole for the losses done to you by the accident. Many people think that if they suffer losses in a motor vehicle accident, they, ipso facto, get the right to be made whole. This is a a misunderstanding. A motor vehicle accident case does not consist of only one (1) part. There are four (4) parts to a motor vehicle accident case.

1. a negligent motorist
2. injuries
3. a causal connection between the accident and the injuries
4. the magnitude of the injury must rise above a vague, ill defined, imaginary line. The name of the line is the serious injury threshold. A description of this vague, ill defined, imaginary line can be found in New York State Insurance Law §5102(d) where the definition of a serious injury is found.  Can you understand it? Most lawyers and judges don't either. It is a moving target.  Defendants argue that a plaintiff's injuries are not serious but minor. Plaintiffs argue that a plaintiff's injuries are not minor but serious.  The jury is given the description of a serious injury found in New York State Insurance Law §5102(d) and applies it to the evidence that was presented during the trial to decide whether the injuries are minor or not.

The plaintiff must present evidence at a trial that proves all four (4) of the parts of a motor vehicle accident case. If the plaintiff only proves three (3) out of the four (4) parts, the plaintiff loses the entire case. There is no victory in coming close. All a defendant needs to do is knock out one (1) of the four (4) parts and the defendant wins. That is why it is easier to be a defendant than a plaintiff.  A defendant picks out the weakest of the four (4) parts and hammers away.

Sometimes it is unclear immediately after an accident whether or not the injuries of an injured person have the magnitude to get passed the serious injury threshold.  All of the other three (3) parts of a motor vehicle accident case are usually clear right after the accident but sometimes not the magnitude of the injuries.  Time needs to pass to see whether the consequences of the injuries rise or fall. At Bosco and Mascolo, Esqs. LLP we accept motor vehicle accident cases immediately if the other parts are strong even though the magnitude of the injuries is unclear. This way we can make sure everything is done right. After about six (6) to nine (9) months post accident, we can tell, having collected and reviewed the medical evidence, whether the evidence of the magnitude of the injuries is sufficient to continue to pursue a case. If it is, the case goes on. If not, we let you know.

Believe it or not: It is legal for a motorist to hurt others in an accident!

It is legal in the State of New York for a motorist to hurt others as long as the magnitude of the injury falls below a vague, ill-defined line. The line is called the serious injury threshold. So, if you hurt them a little bit, you can get away with your negligence in the State of New York.  Put the smallest dent in someone elses car and the law will hold you accountable no matter how small. Dent a person and you are not held accountable as long as "the dent" does not cross the serious injury threshold. Justice for cars but not for people.

Jury renders a $520,000.00 verdict for a motor vehicle accident on Staten Island

Sometimes jurors are hard to figure out. 

An independent witness saw the entire accident.  Her name was on the police report. John Bosco, a lawyer in the accident law firm of Bosco and Mascolo, Esqs., subpoenaed her to testify.  She testified that a NYCTA bus ran the red light and struck his client's car - who had the green light.  Despite this evidence, the jury returned a verdict on the liability half of the trial declaring that the bus driver deserved 60% of the blame and his client deserved 40% of the blame - even though Bosco's client had the green light. Go figure.

On the damages half of the trial, the jury returned a verdict of $400,000.00 for past pain and suffering and $120,000.00 for future pain and suffering for a total of $520,000.00

3.25 Million Settlement by John Bosco for car accident on Nelson Avenue

In 2005, President George Bush signed into law a federal highway bill that gave the lessors of leased vehicles immunity against lawsuits for damage and injury.  Bush's legislation changed New York State Law that holds owners of motor vehicles, including lessors, liable.  Corporations had once again successfully lobbied away the rights of the injured. Bush's gift to the automobile leasing industry, however, was too late to protect the Mercedes Benz Credit Corp whose leased vehicle was involved in a collision on February 8, 2003.

The leased Mercedes, in the process of exiting the St. Clares parking lot onto Nelson Avenue on a busy Saturday afternoon, crashed into a Honda in which our client was a passenger. The crash devastated the vehicles. Our Client was taken by ambulance to the hospital. She eventually had surgery to her right shoulder and lower back.  The case settled for Three million two hundred fifty thousand ($3,250,000.00) dollars after a jury had been selected and the case was assigned for trial to the Honorable Judith N. McMahon, a judge of the Supreme Court in St. George.  "We had lined up four doctors and an economist to testify" Bosco added. Summary Judgment had already been granted against the Mercedes on the issue of liability in January of 2006 by the Honorable Robert J. Gigante, formerly a Supreme Court judge now the Richmond County Surrogate Court Judge. The issues that needed a jury trial were an apportionment of liability amongst the defendants and damages.

Victory Lap at Raceway Park, Englishtown, New Jersey- $200K Settlment

On Sept 20, 2003, our client was part of a group that brought two tow trucks to compete at Raceway Park, in Englishtown, NJ.   They were in the Heavy Tow Truck Category for the Diesel Truck Nationals.  One of the trucks won.  The winning truck was stopped taking on spectators to carry them around the track for the victory lap.  As our client was climbing aboard, the tow truck suddenly lurches forward and begins to go throwing our client off the truck and onto the ground where he injures his knee.  When the case came into the office, it was thought to be a good case.  Then we took the driver's deposition.  The driver testified under oath that our client did not get hurt while he was climbing aboard.  The driver saw our client leap over a barrier, loses his balance and fall onto the ground.  At trial, if the jury believed the defendant, we would lose the case.  It would be our client's word against the driver's word. Or would it?  Security at Raceway Park had witnessed the accident.  For trial, our investigation located the security guard and brought him to Court to testify after the defendant had already testified in Court.  The security guard would show that the Defendant was not telling the truth. Before the security guard appeared, the Insurance Company for the Defendant offered $35,000 to settle.  After the security guard, the case settled for $200,000.00.