Why Would a Negligent Defendant Admit Fault in Your Injury Case?

In a typical personal injury case, where you are claiming that someone else did something wrong or negligent to cause you injury, you would expect that the other side would deny that they did anything wrong. You would think that they would fight you and say that they either did nothing wrong, or that the accident was your fault.

And they do that–sometimes. Because at other times, they may do something that you don’t expect:

They may actually admit that they did something wrong, or that yes, they acted carelessly.

Why They Admit Fault

Why on earth should they do that? It seems like that would be very much against their own interests.

The reason is that by admitting fault–that they did do something wrong to cause the accident–they are making evidence that might be damaging to them potentially irrelevant, and thus, shielding that information from the jury.

Take, for example, a typical DUI case, where a DUI driver causes an accident. That DUI driver does not want the jury to hear that they were driving drunk–that could have a very negative impact on a jury, and a jury might potentially be angry at that driver (as they should be).

But if the Defendant were to admit that they drove drunk, then there is (to them), no reason to use, admit, or have the jury consider, evidence that the driver was drunk. That evidence then becomes superfluous, or unnecessary, or prejudicial, or irrelevant–the argument is that DUI driving is evidence of who is at fault, and they have already admitted they are at fault, so why does the jury ever need to hear that evidence?

If they are correct–and it’s up to a judge whether that evidence gets in–then admitting liability, while at first seeming like a good thing in your injury case–actually is not such a good thing, if in fact, the DUI evidence is excluded.

Defendants often admit liability in simple, rear end car accident cases. They don’t want the jury hearing that their driver didn’t pay attention, and hit you from behind. So, they just admit that the driver rear-ended you.

What You Still Need to Prove

By admitting fault, it doesn’t mean you automatically win or they automatically lose. The Defendant can defend their case, by saying that the accident didn’t cause your injuries, or that you aren’t as injured as you say that are.

In fact, in car accident cases, where you have to show that you have a permanent or substantial injury, they may simply deny that you have an injury that meets that definition. The case then becomes mainly about the nature, extent, and severity of your injuries.

That does save you the step of having to prove liability. But it can, in certain cases, prevent the jury from hearing damaging evidence that you, as the victim, would want the jury to hear.

Schedule a consultation with our Tampa personal injury lawyers at Barbas, Nunez, Sanders, Butler & Hovsepian today to discuss it after your accident or injury so you are prepared for whatever strategy the defendant in your case will use.

Source:

advocatemagazine.com/article/2014-may/trying-the-admitted-liability-auto-case-the-art-of-villainizing