Does a person having dementia and occasionally using a walker prior to an accident preclude the person from receiving compensation for injuries from the accident that include greater memory loss, disorientation, inability to get out of bed without assistance or stand without a walker? I was told by a lawyer that this was so, but this information seems incorrect to me.
Pre-existing Condition
- Thread Starter truth321
- Start date
- Status
army judge
Super Moderator
You may have been misinformed.
Was the lawyer that told you this your lawyer?
Or, was the lawyer that told you this the lawyer for the party you are suing?
I suggest you consult with an attorney, your attorney.
The initial consultation is normally offered at no charge.
That said, it is a good idea to speak to a couple attorneys before you proceed.
It is often wise to speak to a couple of attorneys about a legal matter.
Don't be surprised if you are given conflicting advice.
The answer to your query won't be settled until the evidence has been presented to a jury.
Your query is based in fact.
Factual matters are resolved by the triers of fact, a jury of your peers.
fredrikklaw
Moderator
They never heard of eggshells?
TRUTH321:
The "attorney's" information sounds incorrect to you because it is in fact incorrect, and I certainly hope that he was a divorce or an estate planning attorney who dispatched the info as he will at least have an excuse for getting it wrong.
In any event, having a pre-existing condition is not a bar to recovery of damages based on Tort Law's Eggshell Doctrine which basically says that "the defendant takes the plaintiff as he finds him." In other words, just because the defendant's negligent act causes the reoccurrence of a condition that pre-existed in the plaintiff does not absolve him of liability.
Consult with as many other personal injury attorneys as you can until you find one who remembers what is taught in the very first semester in the very first year of law school and is not afraid to litigate on that basis.
And should they all still play stupid, you would perhaps want to make a very, very discreet mention of the Eggshell doctrine in passing and in a very matter-of-fact, or, I-read-it-in-last-month's-readers-digest-issue manner and leave it at that.
I think you will then have some sort of response.
fredrikklaw
TRUTH321:
The "attorney's" information sounds incorrect to you because it is in fact incorrect, and I certainly hope that he was a divorce or an estate planning attorney who dispatched the info as he will at least have an excuse for getting it wrong.
In any event, having a pre-existing condition is not a bar to recovery of damages based on Tort Law's Eggshell Doctrine which basically says that "the defendant takes the plaintiff as he finds him." In other words, just because the defendant's negligent act causes the reoccurrence of a condition that pre-existed in the plaintiff does not absolve him of liability.
Consult with as many other personal injury attorneys as you can until you find one who remembers what is taught in the very first semester in the very first year of law school and is not afraid to litigate on that basis.
And should they all still play stupid, you would perhaps want to make a very, very discreet mention of the Eggshell doctrine in passing and in a very matter-of-fact, or, I-read-it-in-last-month's-readers-digest-issue manner and leave it at that.
I think you will then have some sort of response.
fredrikklaw
- Status
Ask a Question
Share this page
