NEGLIGENCE IN DIFFERENT TYPES OF PERSONAL INJURY CASES IN SOUTH CAROLINA
No two accidents and injuries are the same. Along those same lines, each act of negligence is vastly different. Consider the examples of negligence in the following types of personal injury cases: Car accidents. Negligence in a car accident lawsuit refers to the legal theory under which the injured party can recover their losses. Basically, negligence means that the responsible party acted in a way that disregarded their duty to drive safely on the road, resulting in injury to the plaintiff.Most car accident lawsuits are based on negligence because negligence does not involve intentional acts by the defendant. Since no one really intends to get into a car accident, there must be some way of legally proving which party is at fault. Thus, negligence claims typically involve a complex analysis to determine whether the defendant failed to follow their duty of safety.
Slip and falls. In a grocery store, a customer slips on a banana peel. The banana peel was dry and black—evidence that it had been dropped a long time before the accident. The store management is likely to be liable for the fall because the banana peel had been on the ground for a long time meaning that management was not doing a reasonable job of regularly cleaning up the platform.
Dog bites. The owner of a dog that has bitten a person in the past decides to go for a walk and brings the dog. The dog is not on a leash when a child approaches and the dog bites the child, leaving the child terribly scarred. Because the dog owner knew of the vicious nature of the dog, the dog should have been properly restrained. A lawsuit could also possibly be brought on the basis of a negligence if a city ordinance required dogs to be kept on leashes in public areas.
Defective products. Use of faulty machinery and tools can result in serious injury. If this damage was caused by a product defect or failure to provide sufficient notice about a risk in the product, the manufacturer or vendor could be held accountable. Defendants involved in these cases are also required to inform consumers of the potential dangers that coincide with misuse of their product if they could reasonably have predicted that the products could be used inappropriately.