You’ve probably heard the words “pain and suffering” related to personal injury cases, but may not know exactly what it is. Pain and suffering is a category that much of the non-tangible damage resulting from an accident falls. For instance, a broken bone would not be included in the pain and suffering category, but the discomfort, inconvenience, and frustration that broken bone caused could be.
Think of it as cause and effect. You were in a serious car accident and significantly injured your leg. That’s the cause. The effect is you can’t get out of bed in the morning without sharp pain coursing up and down your injured leg. You can’t get in and out of the car without someone’s assistance. You can’t play with your son, daughter, or grandchildren. You can’t work. You can’t get from A to B without a wheelchair.
Many who support tort reform believe that pain and suffering shouldn’t be considered in a personal injury case. They believe awarding damages for something subjective, such as pain caused by injuries, leads to inflated verdicts. They’ve clearly never suffered a serious injury or had to watch a loved one go through a painful recovery. At Daniel Stark, we believe it’s important that accident victim’s suffering be considered in a personal injury case because within that category lies the true impact of the accident, and that’s why we seek the maximum amount possible in every personal injury case we handle.
February 9th, 2016|