When in the initial stages of determining whether or not you can file a personal injury lawsuit, you will most likely hear the term negligence thrown around quite often. This term is essential to understand as negligence is critical in establishing a personal injury case.
That’s why in this post we provide a comprehensive overview of the concept of negligence as it relates to personal injury claims and it’s comparison to gross negligence.
Let’s begin.
What is Negligence?
The everyday understanding of negligence often aligns with the colloquial definition of failure to take proper care, but the legal definition is a bit more specific.
Negligence is a person’s failure to behave with the prudent amount of caution and level of care towards another person that could be expected from a reasonable person under the same circumstances. The distinction of the legal term is the addition of the actions affecting another individual and the reliance on the concept of a “reasonable person,” serving as a benchmark for assessing whether a person’s actions or omissions constitute negligence in a legal context.
A personal injury plaintiff must prove the following four elements in a personal injury case:
- duty of care,
- breach of duty,
- causation of injuries, and
- damages
If a plaintiff can prove all four elements of negligence, they may be entitled to compensation for their injuries. Comparative negligence, referred to under Texas Legislature as proportionate responsibility, may reduce the accident victims recovery if they are found to be partially at fault for the accident.
Reasonable Person Standard and Duty of Care
The concept of reasonable duty of care is the cornerstone of the legal definition of negligence. This requires that individuals act as a reasonable person would under similar circumstances, which aims to be objective, based on the behavior of a hypothetical reasonable person, rather than relying on the subjective beliefs or intentions of the individual involved.
The reasonable person is not a real person but a legal fiction used to assess whether someone’s actions were reasonable. The standard is designed to be objective and impartial, avoiding personal biases or idiosyncrasies. The reasonable person standard will not be swayed by an individual’s personal beliefs or abilities, but rather on the expectations of this hypothetical person with average intelligence, knowledge, and judgment abilities.
The specific standard duty of care can vary depending on the circumstances of a case.
For example, a doctor will have a higher standard of care than a layperson, as they are expected to possess certain knowledge and skills. Similarly, if a commercial truck driver hits you, the driver will have a higher standard of care on the road than a casual driver.
This could weigh into a car accident case you are pursuing is against a professional individual or someone who may have a higher legal duty.
Breach of This Reasonable Duty of Care
Once it is established that a defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, the next step in a negligence case is to prove that the defendant breached that duty.
The defendant’s breach occurs when the defendant’s actions or omissions fall below that set standard of care expected of a reasonable person under the same or similar circumstances.
To determine whether a breach has occurred, the court will consider various factors including the nature of the risk, the likelihood of it causing injury, the severity of this potential harm, the cost of avoiding the risk of this harm occurring, and the defendant’s knowledge and experience, as stated above.
The greater the risks and the lower the costs to follow the standard of care, the higher the expectations would be of reasonable care.
By evaluating these factors, the court will determine whether the defendant’s actions or omissions fell below the standard of care expected of a reasonable person.
If a breach is established, the plaintiff must then prove causation and damages to establish their negligence claim.
Causation of Injuries
Causation of InjuriesOnce a plaintiff has established the defendant owed them a duty of care and their actions or omissions breached that, the next element they must prove is causation.
While this may seem obvious, it is important that the plaintiff demonstrate the direct link of the defendant’s negligence causing plaintiff’s injuries. There are two types of causation that may be referenced in a negligence case: factual causation and proximate causation.
Factual causation requires the plaintiff to prove that their injuries would not have occurred but for the defendant’s negligence. This is sometimes referred to as the “but for” test. Proximate causation requires the plaintiff to prove the injuries were a foreseeable result of that negligence.
To establish a solid case to support causation, the plaintiff may need to call upon an expert to provide testimony or other evidence to establish a link between the defendant’s negligent actions or omissions and their injuries.
The burden of proof is on the injured party to demonstrate that the defendant’s negligence was the direct, factual, and proximate cause of their injuries.
What is Gross Negligence?
While ordinary negligence focuses on carelessness, gross negligence takes it a step further.
Under Texas law, gross negligence involves not only a failure to exercise reasonable care but also “a reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of others.”
According to the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 41.001, gross negligence has two components:
- Objective risk: The defendant’s conduct must involve extreme risk, “considering the probability and magnitude of potential harm to others.”
- Subjective awareness: The defendant must have actual, subjective knowledge “of the risk involved but, nevertheless, proceed with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others.”
Gross negligence occurs when the defendant’s actions go beyond mere carelessness. The defendant must have known their actions posed a significant risk but chose to ignore it.
For example, if a construction company fails to provide safety harnesses to workers on high scaffolding despite knowing the danger, that could be considered gross negligence.
Key Differences Between Negligence and Gross Negligence
Understanding the difference between gross negligence and ordinary negligence is critical in Texas personal injury cases. While both hinge on a failure to exercise proper care, gross negligence requires a higher level of recklessness and disregard for safety. This distinction not only affects the legal process but also the types of damages that you may recover.
There are several critical differences between negligence and gross negligence, including:
Level of Risk and Awareness
The key difference between ordinary negligence and gross negligence lies in the level of risk involved and the defendant’s awareness of that risk. Ordinary negligence consists of a failure to act with reasonable care, but the defendant may not have been aware of the danger their actions posed. Gross negligence, on the other hand, requires the defendant to know about the extreme risk but choose to ignore it.
Legal Standards and Proof
To prove gross negligence in Texas, you must meet a higher legal standard than for ordinary negligence. Specifically, you must show that the defendant acted with reckless disregard, not just carelessness. Gross negligence cases typically require more substantial evidence to demonstrate that the defendant acted with conscious indifference to the safety of others.
Impact on Damages
One of the most significant implications of gross negligence in Texas personal injury cases is its impact on damages.
In negligence cases, you may be entitled to compensatory damages, which are intended to cover the costs of medical bills, lost wages, physical pain, emotional suffering, and other injury-related losses.
In cases involving gross negligence, however, you may also be entitled to exemplary damages, sometimes called punitive damages. As explained in Chapter 15 of Texas’ pattern jury instructions, punitive damages are not intended to compensate you, like compensatory damages, but rather to punish the defendant’s egregious conduct and deter similar behavior in the future.
Proving Gross Negligence in a Texas PI Case
I
n Texas, you must present clear and convincing evidence of the defendant’s extreme conduct to succeed in a gross negligence claim.
In addition to showing that the defendant’s conduct posed an extreme degree of risk, you must also prove their subjective awareness of the risk.
Proving gross negligence in a Texas personal injury case requires strong evidence, as the standard is higher than for ordinary negligence. Clear and convincing evidence is a higher threshold than the preponderance of the evidence standard used in typical civil cases.
This means the evidence must be highly and substantially more likely to be true than not. Here are some key types of evidence that can help establish gross negligence:
- Witness testimony: It can be crucial to have witnesses who can attest to the defendant’s reckless behavior or knowledge of the risks.
- Documentation: Emails, internal reports, or safety inspection records can show that the defendant was made aware of the risk but failed to act.
- Expert testimony: In some cases, expert testimony may be necessary to establish the degree of risk or the defendant’s knowledge.
- Prior incidents or violations: Evidence of past similar incidents or regulatory violations can show a pattern of reckless disregard.
Our experienced personal injury lawyers can help gather the necessary evidence, build a strong case, and pursue punitive damages to hold the defendant accountable for their reckless behavior.
Statute of Limitations and the Legal Process
Whether a PI case involves negligence or gross negligence, acting within Texas’ statute of limitations is crucial. Generally, you must file a personal injury lawsuit within two years of the injury date. Failing to do so can result in the court dismissing the case, barring you from recovering any compensation.
Additionally, proving gross negligence can be challenging, so it is essential for you to work with our experienced Lubbock personal injury lawyers.
Our skilled attorneys collect relevant and necessary evidence, expert testimony, and legal arguments to build a strong case and maximize the potential for punitive damages.
Contact Us Today to Schedule a Free Consultation
If you or a loved one has been injured due to someone else’s negligence or gross negligence, you must seek legal counsel. Our qualified personal injury attorneys at Liggett Law Group can help assess your case, decide how to act, and fight for the compensation you deserve.
In PI law, knowing your rights and understanding the nuances between different legal concepts can significantly affect your case’s outcome. Contact our personal injury attorneys today to schedule a free consultation to explore your legal options.