1-800-964-0361
Lawyers have to learn and then remember the principles behind the thin skull rule. That is due to the fact that the thin skull rule was designed by the legal system, in order to limit the various tactics that a defense lawyer can use, during a courtroom trial. It also puts a limit on the methods used by a defense attorney during the negotiations for a settlement, following the filing of a personal injury claim.
What the thin skull rule allows and does not allow:
The defense team that is offering support to a defendant cannot claim that a previous injury increased the plaintiff’s chances for becoming injured, at the time of a given accident. The defense team can gain access to information on a plaintiff’s prior injury, but the same team cannot suggest that the earlier problem made the current injury more severe.
An attorney for a defendant does have the ability to suggest alternate possibilities to the plaintiff’s lawyer. For instance, the Personal Injury Lawyer in Orillia representing the plaintiff might be told that his or her client should have been wearing an extra seat-belt, owing to the existence of the earlier injury. This might push the plaintiff’s attorney to accept a lower compensation award.
No legal authority knows what gets said by each lawyer, during negotiations for a settlement. That is why a defense team can use that time to make some outrageous suggestions. By introducing such suggestions, a defense attorney can try to skirt around the obstacle that has been created by the thin skull rule.
Assumption made by those that created the thin skull rule:
That rule assumes that the plaintiff has a stable pre-existing condition. If the condition has not stabilized, then the crumbling skull rule applies. According to the crumbling skull rule, the plaintiff’s actions have the ability to increase chances for deterioration of a part of the body, one that healed from an injury on an earlier date.
If a defense attorney tries to make use of the crumbling skull rule, the lawyer for the plaintiff should make a point of studying the plaintiff’s medical records. Such records should indicate whether or not the plaintiff’s pre-existing condition has stabilized. Proof that it has stabilized would underscore the wisdom behind using the thin skull rule.
A message in the rule about the thin cranium:
That rule underlines the fact that no driver gets to pick and choose, regarding the medial history of anyone that might be victimized by that same driver’s negligence. In other words, the party responsible for a given accident has to deal with the degree to which that same collision has had an effect on others. Indeed, careless and neglectful actions can affect numerous people.