The Four Elements of Negligence in Auto Accident Cases

​In tort law, negligence is the failure to act in a way that a reasonable person would act under similar circumstances. To win a negligence lawsuit, the injured party must prove four elements: existence of a duty of care, breach of duty of care, causation, and damages.

If a relationship exists between the defendant and the plaintiff requiring the former to act in a certain manner to protect the latter from foreseeable or reasonable harm, there’s a duty of care. All drivers have a duty to protect other road users as well as their passengers by observing traffic laws. After the court has established that the defendant was responsible for the safety of the injured party, it then determines whether the accused breached their duty of care. In the example above, running a red light is a breach of duty of care.

It’s not enough to prove the duty of care. The plaintiff must also prove that the defendant’s breach caused the injury. There are two parts to causation: cause-in-fact and proximate cause of harm.

To prove a cause-in-fact, also called “but for” causation or actual cause, the plaintiff must show that their injury would not have occurred were it not for the at-fault driver’s action or inaction. If, by running the red light, the at-fault driver hit the defendant, the impact would be a direct result of their negligence. The plaintiff can attribute any injuries they suffered to the accident.

Proving a cause-in-fact establishes a strong foundation, but may not be enough to prove causation. The plaintiff may have to prove proximate cause. That is, they must demonstrate that the at-fault driver could have reasonably foreseen the outcome of their negligent behavior. A reasonable driver should know the consequences of rolling through a red light.

Finally, the plaintiff must prove that the at-fault driver’s negligence caused them damages - actual, legally recognized losses. Damages can be economic or non-economic. Economic damages include costs related to treatment, hiring help, and repairing or replacing damaged personal property, as well as lost wages. Non-economic damages are harder to quantify and include loss of companionship, emotional distress, disfigurement, and pain.

In awarding claims, the court will establish the extent of the plaintiff’s contribution to their accident or injury. Pure contributory negligence states bar injured persons from recovering damages if they were responsible even slightly for the accident or injury. In pure comparative negligence states, plaintiffs may recover damages regardless of their level of fault.

Under the Illinois modified comparative negligence rule, the plaintiff may recover damages even if they are found to be partly responsible, but only if they were not 50 percent or more at fault. Illinois laws consider the injured party contributorily negligent if they fail to protect themselves. For example, if the plaintiff, at the time of the accident, was using their phone, they carry some blame for the accident and subsequent injuries, which will, in turn, limit any award.

Other factors the court may consider in determining damages include the plaintiff’s age, health, and the severity of the injuries. A younger person may receive more damages than someone who is retired for similar injuries, given the larger impact on the former’s earning potential. Courts may also award punitive damages, separate from the legal claims, for extremely reckless or malicious acts to deter would-be offenders.

In auto accident cases, the proof lies with the plaintiff. A personal injury attorney can improve the odds of winning the case. Individuals injured in auto accidents should seek immediate medical attention. They should also keep records of any medical or other bills related to the accident. This will aid in proving damages and causation.

Benjamin and Shapiro Ltd

Shop