Personal injury law in New York State is a form of tort law, which offers a legal recourse to individuals who have sustained some form of harm or injury as a result of the wrongful or neglectful actions of another party.
That damage or injury can take the form of physical, mental, reputational or property damage, and it can be irrespective if came because of outright intentional misconduct or a simply negligent act. To successfully make a claim in this area, the plaintiff must prove the existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty, to prove how that breach resulted in the injury, and proving the existence of actual damages.
Common Law Origins
Personal injury law finds much of its roots in British common law that began between the 13th and 16th centuries. Torts, known as “writs of trespass,” required a wrongdoer to pay damages directly to a victim. Torts were narrowly limited to direct injuries inflicted by force at first, but over time, the definition expanded to non-violent injuries, where an element of force could be implied. American colonial courts adopted these same principles.
Before the 1800s, personal injury lawsuits that pursued monetary damages were virtually nonexistent. This was a function of the community structure of the time, where serious accidents usually involved closely associated individuals, as well as financial constraints, as there were little in the way of insurance and most individuals lacked the resources to pay a monetary judgment.
One unjust barrier to recovery was the maxim “actio personalis moritur cum persona,” which is roughly translated to “the cause of action dies when the victim dies.” Therefore, if the victim is merely maimed, then damages are recoverable, but if the victim is killed, there are no civil liabilities.
The Industrial Revolution and the Rise of Modern Personal Injury Law
One of the secondary impacts of the The Industrial Revolution was the advent of tort law. There was a meteoric rise in the number of workplace accidents, product defects, and transportation crashes.
According to one study, tort lawsuits in New York City went from 4% of the caseload to 40%, a ten-fold increase. With industrialization, the complexity of cases also increased, which forced the formalization of negligence as a core principle of tort law. The elements of negligence, as we covered above, are duty, beach, causation and damages.
In 1847, New York became the first state to adopt a wrongful death statute, which was closely modeled after a British law that was passed in 1846. This allowed families to recover the monetary value of their lost loved one’s expected wages and services they would have provided.
In 1910, New York continued to lead the way with what is considered the first workers’ compensation law in the United States. This provided an avenue for injured workers and families to recover compensation with zero regard for fault. The law was challenged in court until the tragic Triangle Shirtwaist Factory incident in Manhattan made the moral case for grieving families to recover financial damages even when the responsible company was bankrupt and unable to pay any compensation.
To cement the law, a stipulation was added that said that workers cannot sue their employer for the same injury that they receive workers’ compensation for.
Here is an overview of how some of the prime areas of personal injury law that we practice have developed in the modern era:
1. Premises Liability and Slip and Fall Accidents
Historically, premises liability in New York State tied the home or venue owner’s duty to the status of the visitor. Was the visitor invited, or licensed, or trespassing? Plaintiffs would have to prove that the owner had notice, either knowing or “should have known” about dangerous conditions. This mean that the spill or icy patch existed long enough to be discovered by the owner, who then had a duty to do something about it to provide a safe environment for an invited visitor.
However, in 1976, the landmark case called Basso v. Miller rejected this paradigm. The Court of Appeals case established that a landowner owes every entrant, regardless of status, a “single standard of reasonable care under the circumstances.”
That means that the duty of care depends more on the foreseeability of harm than on the status of the visitor, with a focus on what precautions a reasonable owner should take.
2. Car Crashes
The adoption of the automobile shepherded in a slew of new regulations and tort claims. By the 1920s, over a million New Yorkers were driving, and courts typically applied regular negligence to injuries from driver collisions. In 1973, however, New York became the first state to enact a mandatory no-fault insurance system. To this day, each driver’s insurer pays medical bills and limited damages regardless of fault, which reduces litigation for minor crashes.
In 1975, the legislature adopted pure comparative negligence, which allows injured parties to recover even if they were mostly at fault, with damages reduced proportionally. New York is one of only ten states that permits recovery despite any percentage of fault.
3. Motorcycle Crashes
Motorcycles tracked along with cars in New York; they were held to the same negligence rules. In 1967, New York became the first state in the country to require motorcyclists to wear certified helmets, due to a rise in motorcycle fatalities.
What followed were mandatory liability insurance and rider licensing rules. Motorcycle personal injury laws operate under “comparative fault” rules, but the use of helmets and following rider licensing rules can influence how much liability and damages you can recover.
4. Truck and Commercial Vehicle Accidents
Large trucks and commercial vehicle accidents are governed by general negligence principles. In 1974, a deadly bus-train collision near Congers, NY spurred a law that required strict qualifications for bus and school drivers. New York tends to impose stringent licensure, insurance and safety standards on trucking companies and bus lines; for personal injury cases, truck accidents are adjudicated similarly to car crashes, with plaintiff and driver negligence assessed under our state’s fault rules.
5. Dog Bite Laws
For a long time, New York followed the well-known “one bite rule.” Owners have only been held liable if they knew, or should have known, about their dog’s vicious propensities. In 2006, Bard v. Jahnke limited liability to strict liability for known-dangerous dogs, which disallowed ordinary negligence claims. This meant, for example, that an owner who left a large dog, without prior attacks, unleashed, they could avoid liability. The law also provided that owners of declared “dangerous dogs” would be liabile for victim’s medical costs.
This year, however, the Flanders v. Goodfellow case held that dog bite victims may pursue ordinary negligence claims as well as strict liability claims. Even if a dog had no documented history of aggression, the court reasoned it was unfair to bar a negligence claim.
What does this mean for New York dog owners? Owners owe a general duty to exercise “reasonable care” in restraining their animals, even if they have no record of aggression.