Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 10-15-2024
Case Style:
Lance Adams v. Crown Equipment Corporation
Case Number: 5:23-cv-00123
Judge: Danny C. Reeve
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky (Fayette County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney: Michael J. Farrell, Michelle Ceclia Marie Fox, D. Christopher RobJames Benjamin Shepard inson,
Description:
Lexington, Kentucky personal injury auto negligence truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff.
Kentucky's auto negligence law is based on a pure comparative negligence system, which means that the amount of damages an injured party can recover is based on their percentage of fault in an accident:
Fault determination
The total amount of damages is calculated, and then the injured party's percentage of fault is used to adjust the amount they can recover.
Examples
If an injured party is 30% at fault for an accident, they can recover 70% of the total damages.
Partial fault
Even if an injured party is partially at fault, they can still recover some damages.
Some other things to know about auto negligence law in Kentucky include:
Statute of limitations
The statute of limitations for auto accident claims in Kentucky is two years.
Damages
Damages can be economic or non-economic. Economic damages include medical expenses, lost income, and repair or replacement of damaged cars. Non-economic damages include pain, emotional distress, and disability or disfigurement.
Negligent driving
Certain types of negligent driving, like reckless driving, can reduce the chances of an injured party claiming compensation.
Gross negligence
Some driving behaviors can be considered gross negligence, which can lead to a tragic outcome.
Working with a lawyer
A lawyer can help you understand your legal rights and options, gather evidence, and negotiate with insurance companies.
Outcome: 10/15/2024 ***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Danny C. Reeves for review: re 94 Proposed Agreed Order of Dismissal by Crown Equipment Corporation (GLD) (Entered: 10/15/2024)
10/15/2024 95 ORDER DISMISSING CASE: 1) Parties' 94 Motion to dismiss is GRANTED. 2) Complaint, Intervenor Complaint & Counterclaim are DISMISSED with prejudice. 3) Defendant Crown Equipment Corporation is the only actual Crown legal entity named in this action. However, it is the intent of the parties and this Order that the dismissal of claims extends to this defendant which does business under the trade names: Crown Lift Trucks and Crown Lift Trucks Lexington. 4) Parties shall bear their respective costs, fees and expenses. 5) Action DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the docket. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 10/15/2024. (DC) cc: COR (Entered: 10/15/2024)
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: