Archive for the ‘Washington Personal Injury Law’ Category
Personal Injury Damages
April 8th, 2009 | 
Author: Under Washington personal injury law an injury victim must prove negligence and proximate causation.
After establishing negligence and proximate causation the injury victim must prove damages. There are various types of damages that are recoverable upon proof by the injury victim. The compensable elements of personal injury damages under Washington personal injury law are established by case law and statute.
Posted in 
Claims Against Family Members
There is no family tort immunity in Washington.[1] Also, insurance policies that exclude coverage for injury caused by family members are unenforceable under Washington law.[2] The same is true for insurance policy exclusions of family members for UIM coverage.[3]
Comparative Fault in Washington
Until 1973 Washington followed a rule of contributory negligence under which is an injury victim was partially at fault, even partially, this was a complete defense to the injury claim. This lead to many harsh results and exceptions to the rule.[1]
A comparative negligence statute went into effect in 1974 that eliminated the contributory negligence rule of a complete bar to recovery and replaced it with a rule that the plaintiff’s claim is lowered by the proportion of the plaintiff’s fault.[2]
Liability of Minors for Personal Injury Claims
Many assume that parents are “automatically” liable for damages caused by their children. Washington personal injury law is not so simple.
Traffic Citations and Fault
Many assume that a driver involved in an automobile accident who is cited by police is automatically liable. Under Washington tort law this is not true. Read the rest of this entry »
Negligence
Negligence
With some narrow exceptions, to recover for an injury an inured person in Washington must established that another party was at fault, or negligent.
Negligence has four elements. [1]
1. A duty
The injured person bears the burden of alleging and proving all four elements.[2]
The duty of an adult is to exercise the ordinary care that a reasonably careful person would exercise under similar circumstances. The duty for children depends on the age of the child. Contrary to a common belief parents are not strictly liable for the actions of their children.
Proximate causation is a nuanced legal concept. There are two elements of proximate causation, cause in fact and legal causation. Legal causation is a determination of whether liability should attach as a matter of law once causation in fact is established. [3]
[1] Nivens v. 7-11 Hoagy’s Corner, 133 Wn. 2d 192, 198, 943 P.2d 286 91997); Degal v. Majestic Mobile Manor, 129 Wn.2d 43, 48, 914 P.2d 728 (1996).
[2] Walters v. Aberdeen Recreation, Inc., 75 Wn.App. 710, 879 P.2d 337 (1994).
[3] Hartley v. State, 103 Wn.2d 768, 777-780, 698 P.2d 77 (1985); Taggart v. State, 188 Wn.2d 195, 822 P.2d 243 (1992).<–>
