Assumption of Risk in a Texas Personal Injury Case – Houston Personal Injury Lawyers
How Does Assumption of the Risk Factor into my Personal Injury Case?
If you are hurt in an accident, a common defense by the person or company that hurt you is that you assumed the risk of your injury. Assumption of the risk is a legal doctrine that dates back to ancient England. Just as it sounds, assumption of the risk is a wrongdoer’s claim that you knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risks associated with whatever you were doing when you were injured, and therefore the wrongdoer owes you nothing.More information on this website @ https://fordandlaurel.com/
An example is skydiving: If something goes wrong during your skydiving jump and you are injured, and if you sue the skydiving company for compensation for your injuries, the company will claim that you voluntarily jumped from the plane fully knowing just how dangerous skydiving is. No one forced you to jump. You didn’t think you were playing tennis. You knew you were about to jump from a plane and you jumped willingly: you assumed the risk of the injuries related to skydiving. Ski resorts and scuba diving companies also claim customers assume the natural risks associated with those sports.
No Recovery for Injured Person
If the person who injured you successfully asserts assumption of risk as a defense in your lawsuit against them, you will potentially recover nothing. Assumption of risk is a total bar to your reimbursement. The reason: in theory, if you assume the risk of injury, the wrongdoer no longer owes you a duty of care. Without a duty of care, and a breach of that duty, there can be no negligence.
To fully assume a risk of being hurt, you have to:
Know just how dangerous something is, and voluntarily do it anyway.
If you ask someone if an activity is safe and they assure you it is when it really isn’t, you do not voluntarily assume anything. Their assurance that the activity is safe makes your assumption of the risk involuntary. And if you run into a burning home, you may be said to have assumed risk. But if you run into a burning home to save your family members’ lives, it can be argued that you did not do so voluntarily: you had no choice in the matter.
While negligence is an objective standard – what a reasonable person would have done –assumption of the risk uses a subjective standard. The question is: did you fully appreciate the risk of what you were doing.
For example, just because you assume a risk, does not mean you assume all risks. If you ride with a friend knowing he has been drinking alcohol, you assume some risk of the injuries associated his drinking and driving. But if your drunken friend’s car has defective tires on it that you don’t know about, and the defective tires cause an accident, you did not knowingly assume that risk.
State Laws and Car Accidents
Some states have done away with this old English doctrine when it comes to car accidents. In some old cases, people who caused accidents then claimed injured people assumed the risk of injury simply by driving vehicles on roadways.
This acted as a total bar to recovery by the injured people. Modern state laws, like those in Texas, allocate responsibility according to who is at fault: for example, 75% to one person involved in an accident and 25% to the other.
Our Law Office has been representing personal injury victims for over 20 years. Today our team represents men and women injured in all kinds of mishaps. If you are involved in a personal injury case and need a lawyer, please call us. Or visit this site @ https://www.carabinshaw.com/el-paso-auto-accidents.html