That depends. Liability is liability, but in Illinois personal injury damages where the victim shares in responsibility for the accident is governed by Comparative Negligence. Comparative negligence states that the amount of recoverable damages may be reduced by an amount or percentage representing the amount of liability the victim bears in the cause of the accident. In Illinois a modified form of comparative negligence is observed where in order to receive anything from a personal injury claim, the victim must bear less than 50% of the responsibility for the accident. 

So, your chances of getting personal injury damages are just as good so long as you bear less than 50% of the fault for the accident. When you do, the damage award can be reduced by whatever percentage of fault you are found to bear in the accident.  

The theory of negligence in personal injury law is based on the idea that an individual or entity owes a “duty of care” to others. What others? That depends. A retail store owner owes a duty of care to its customers to maintain a safe establishment and ensure that any hazards that develop are removed to prevent harm in a reasonable amount of time. A driver has a duty of care to ensure that they take reasonable steps to avoid risk of harm to others on the roads. Likewise, a physician has a duty of care to provide reasonably safe treatment to their patients. However, do they have the same duty of care to those who are not officially their patients? What if a man who is not their patient is suffering a heart attack in a public restaurant, and the physician fails to act to treat them before EMTs can be called. Have they breached their duty of care? Not likely. They may not have acted so ethically in the moment, but the fact is in order to establish negligence in this case, you have to first establish that there is a patient/doctor relationship. There was none here. So before establishing neglect, you must first demonstrate that the person or entity owed a duty of care to the accident victim. 

Let’s say, for instance, a couple invites a repair man in their home to fix their furnace and they have a pit bull that has demonstrated twice before the propensity to bite strangers. The dog is running around loose in their home at the time of the visit. Failing to secure the dog when inviting the repair man into their home could leave the couple liable for personal injury damages. But what happens to this claim if it’s not a repair man invited into the home but an intruder who breaks into the home. Do they owe a duty of care to the repair man? Certainly. Do they have a duty of care to the intruder? Under Illinois law, property owners do not owe a duty of care to trespassing adults. So if the dog were to attack the intruder and cause serious injury. The intruder is likely on the hook for their injuries (perhaps along with some criminal liability, but that’s a different blog).

Once you have established a duty of care, you have to learn what their responsibilities under that duty of care are in your situation. Say, for instance, you suffer medical harm in an emergency room while being treated for a critical injury. In most cases, people will expect that anything that goes wrong during treatment, any mistakes that are made qualify as medical malpractice. But the duty of care owed in an emergency room situation may be different than what’s owed in a more normalized treatment environment. The question is what would another qualified and educated medical professional have done in the same situation under the same circumstances. If it can be established that other qualified physicians or medical professionals  likely would have made the same mistake under the same circumstances, there is no breach of their duty of care.

You can see how complex this question of neglect can be. So it’s important to get your claim evaluated by an experienced personal injury attorney who can carefully review the facts of your case and assess whether or not the potential defendant owed you a duty of care, whether they breached that duty of care, and to what extent that breach caused your injuries.

There are several mistakes to avoid whenever you file a personal injury claim. Firstly, never delay treatment after an accident. Delay in treatment can convey the message that the injuries sustained are not serious. And, while some serious injuries may not present right away with dramatic symptoms, brain injuries and soft tissue injuries can develop into very serious health issues requiring extensive medical care. Seeking medical treatment right away after your accident is the only way to be sure you can address any issues early and to protect your ability to fight for personal injury compensation. 

Another big mistake to avoid is speaking with an insurer when you have a personal injury attorney in the aftermath of an accident.  You can’t expect the defendant’s insurer to operate on your behalf. Discussing your claim with their representative(s) can negatively impact your case, providing necessary information to help build a case against you for their client. 

It is indeed possible to recover personal injury damages when you’re injured at work. The fact is workers compensation is not the only recourse for someone injured on the job. There are several circumstance that lend themselves to a personal injury claim. Say, for instance, you are injured by a defective device or machine. If the manufacturer can be found negligent either in the machine’s design or production, or if they can be found to have not provided adequate warning on the machine’s inherent risk or instructions on its safe operation, you might have a product liability claim in addition to your workers compensation filing.

That may be a tricky question. It really depends on the injury, the accident that caused it and the assumption of risk. In personal injury law, there is an assumption of risk when one indulges in a sport like skiing or snowboarding. Because participating in the activity comes with a higher level of risk, the participant assumes a certain measure of that risk. If, however, the ski resort is found to be negligent in maintaining equipment or grounds or even equipment, and this contributed to the injuries, they may be held liable for damages. However, if a skier is injured simply gliding the slopes and makes an error that ends them smack up against a tree, they could be on the hook for medical costs due to the assumption of risk.