Attorney James Sabatini has reached another settlement for his client involved in a car accident that left little visible property damage. Cases involving little visible property damage are challenging. The lack of visible property damage provides the defense lawyer with a simple and easy argument- if there is no significant property damage, how can there be a real injury? There are multiple ways in which to counter such an argument. One, while there may be little visible property damage, has there been an inspection of the vehicle behind the bumper cover. In many instances, the damage from the collision is covered by the bumper guard. Two, did anyone hear a noise caused by the impact? If the answer is yes, then the impact was significant enough to cause a noise. Three, did the impact cause the body of the occupant of the vehicle to be moved. If yes, then the impact was significant and real. Four, was the defendant surprised by the lack of damage to his car. If yes, then the impact was significant. Five, did the injured person have any prior injuries/accidents or subsequent injuries/accidents involving the same body part claimed to be injured in the present collision. If the answer is no, it is a powerful argument that through a process of elimination, only the subject collision could have caused the injuries. Six, do you have a credible doctor supporting the person’s claim of injury? If you do not, the chances of success are seriously if utterly damaged. These are some but not all of the items used to take a case that is perceived to be weak by the insurance company and transform itin to a case of strength resulting either in a strong settlement or well positioned for a successful outcome at trial.
