If you have a car accident case, you better have some visible property damage. I had a client call me recently. He got bumped in a parking lot. When I asked him about the extent of the property damage, he explained that it was hard to actually see the damage. In fact, his car looked just fine. However, he explained that the bumper was damaged and one would be able to better understand the damage once the bumper was removed and examined more closely. I told him that juries don’t want to examine bumpers closely. They want to easily see the damage to your vehicle. Juries don’t want to “work” to see your property damage. They don’t want to squint. If they have to squint to see the damage, then it is going to be a very uphill battle to persuade them the impact was significant enough to cause injury.
I’ve done enough jury trials to know that if the jury can’t see damage to your car, then 98% of the time, you’re going to lose your case no matter how significant the impact was. I’m not saying it’s fair….I’m saying it’s just the way things are.
I’ve spent much of my career as a defense lawyer. I never lost a trial where the plaintiff had no visible property damage…no matter how hard they tried to explain things. That is why I can’t take a personal injury case unless there is some degree of visible damage. Of course, take pictures of any physical injuries you have as well.
by Robert Mansour
Robert Mansour is a personal injury lawyer serving Santa Clarita, Valencia, Saugus, Canyon Country, Newhall, Stevenson Ranch, Castaic and surrounding communities.