What defences might be used to challenge liability in a pedestrian accident case?

In a pedestrian accident case involving a driver in New Mexico, there are a few defences that could be used to challenge liability. The most common defence used is to claim that the pedestrian acted negligently, such as by abruptly darting into the road or not following traffic laws such as jaywalking. This defence can be further supported by providing a witness statement or surveillance footage to prove that the pedestrian was not behaving properly. Another defence used is to claim that the driver was not at fault for the accident. This could be the case if the pedestrian acted negligently or if there were unforeseen circumstances that the driver could not have avoided, such as sudden weather changes. The driver could also prove that they were not responsible for the accident by providing evidence that they were following the speed limit, had all proper safety equipment such as working headlights, and/or were not distracted or impaired in any way. Lastly, the driver may also attempt to prove that the pedestrian should have taken more reasonable precautions when entering the road, such as paying closer attention to vehicle traffic or using a crosswalk instead of jaywalking. This defence could be supported by providing witness statements or surveillance footage that shows the pedestrian’s behaviour and actions before entering the road. While these defences could be used to challenge liability in a pedestrian accident case, ultimately the court will decide fault based on the evidence provided. The outcome of the case will depend on the strength of the defences.

What defences might be used to challenge liability in a pedestrian accident case?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts