Denver Rear-End Collision Attorneys: Protecting Your Rights After an Accident

Seek legal expertise with Denver’s premier rear-end car accident attorneys. Our legal eagles soar above the rest, relentlessly pursuing justice for victims of negligent drivers. From meticulous investigations to assertive courtroom representation, we meticulously craft a winning strategy, leaving no stone unturned in securing your rightful compensation.

Rear-end collisions, often caused by distracted or reckless drivers, can leave you with a shattered vehicle and a broken body. Our attorneys understand the physical, emotional, and financial toll such accidents exact. We stand by your side, navigating the complexities of insurance companies and legal proceedings, ensuring that your rights are protected at every turn. Our commitment to excellence is unwavering; we meticulously dissect case details, leaving no loophole unexplored.

Furthermore, our team possesses an intimate understanding of local laws and regulations governing rear-end car accidents. This deep knowledge enables us to craft persuasive arguments that resonate with judges and juries alike. We relentlessly push for maximum compensation, leaving no stone unturned in our pursuit of justice. Your well-being is our paramount concern; we strive to alleviate your burdens, empowering you to focus on healing and rebuilding your life. Trust Denver’s leading rear-end car accident attorneys to champion your cause and secure the justice you deserve.

Common Defenses Used by Insurance Companies

1. You Were Not Injured

This is a common defense used by insurance companies in rear-end accidents, especially when there is little or no property damage. They may argue that you are exaggerating your injuries or that you were not injured at all.

2. You Failed to Mitigate Your Damages

Insurance companies may argue that you failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate your damages after the accident. For example, they may say that you should have sought medical attention sooner or that you should have taken medication to relieve your pain.

3. You Were Driving While Impaired

If you were driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the accident, the insurance company may argue that you are liable for your injuries.

4. You Were Speeding

The insurance company may argue that you were speeding at the time of the accident, which contributed to your injuries.

5. You Ran a Red Light or Stop Sign

If you ran a red light or stop sign at the time of the accident, the insurance company may argue that you were negligent and that you are liable for your injuries.

6. You Were Not Wearing a Seat Belt

If you were not wearing a seat belt at the time of the accident, the insurance company may argue that you failed to take reasonable steps to protect yourself from injury and that you are therefore liable for your injuries.

7. The Other Driver Was Not Negligent

The insurance company may argue that the other driver was not negligent and that you are therefore not entitled to compensation for your injuries.

8. You Were Partially at Fault for the Accident

The insurance company may argue that you were partially at fault for the accident, which would reduce the amount of compensation you are entitled to.

9. You Have a Pre-existing Condition

The insurance company may argue that you have a pre-existing condition that contributed to your injuries and that you are therefore not entitled to compensation for your injuries.

10. You Did Not Seek Medical Attention Promptly

The insurance company may argue that you did not seek medical attention promptly after the accident, which caused your injuries to worsen.

10. Your Injuries Are Not Related to the Accident

Insurance companies may argue that your injuries are not related to the accident, but rather to a pre-existing condition or to another event.

11. You Are Exaggerating Your Injuries

Insurance companies may argue that you are exaggerating your injuries in order to receive a larger settlement.

12. You Are Seeking Unreasonable Damages

Insurance companies may argue that you are seeking unreasonable damages for your injuries, such as pain and suffering.

13. You Have a History of Filing False or Exaggerated Claims

Insurance companies may argue that you have a history of filing false or exaggerated claims, which makes your current claim less credible.

14. You Are Not Cooperating with the Insurance Company

Insurance companies may argue that you are not cooperating with their investigation of your claim, which makes it difficult for them to determine whether you are entitled to compensation.

15. You Have Obtained a Policy Through Misrepresentation or Fraud

Insurance companies may argue that you obtained your policy through misrepresentation or fraud, which renders the policy void.

| Defense | Description | Example |
|—|—|—|
| You were not injured | The insurance company argues that you are not actually injured, or that your injuries are not as severe as you claim. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you did not seek medical attention immediately after the accident, or that your injuries are not visible. |
| You failed to mitigate your damages | The insurance company argues that you failed to take reasonable steps to reduce your damages after the accident. | The insurance company may argue that you should have sought medical attention sooner, or that you should have taken medication to relieve your pain. |
| You were driving while impaired | The insurance company argues that you were driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the accident. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you failed a blood alcohol test or that you were seen driving erratically. |
| You were speeding | The insurance company argues that you were speeding at the time of the accident. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you were cited for speeding or that you were driving in excess of the speed limit. |
| You ran a red light or stop sign | The insurance company argues that you ran a red light or stop sign at the time of the accident. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you were cited for running a red light or stop sign, or that there were witnesses who saw you run the red light or stop sign. |
| You were not wearing a seat belt | The insurance company argues that you were not wearing a seat belt at the time of the accident. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you were not wearing a seat belt, or that you were wearing it improperly. |
| The other driver was not negligent | The insurance company argues that the other driver was not negligent and that you are therefore not entitled to compensation for your injuries. | The insurance company may point to the fact that the other driver had the right of way, or that you were speeding or driving recklessly. |
| You were partially at fault for the accident | The insurance company argues that you were partially at fault for the accident, which would reduce the amount of compensation you are entitled to. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you were speeding, or that you failed to yield the right of way. |
| You have a pre-existing condition | The insurance company argues that you have a pre-existing condition that contributed to your injuries and that you are therefore not entitled to compensation for your injuries. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you have a history of back pain, or that you were injured in a previous accident. |
| You did not seek medical attention promptly | The insurance company argues that you did not seek medical attention promptly after the accident, which caused your injuries to worsen. | The insurance company may point to the fact that you did not see a doctor until several days or weeks after the accident. |

The Impact of Comparative Negligence on Rear-End Accident Claims

Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine that apportions fault among multiple parties in a personal injury case. In the context of rear-end accidents, comparative negligence can significantly impact the amount of compensation an injured party can recover.

In most states that follow the comparative negligence system, the amount of compensation an injured party can recover is reduced in proportion to their percentage of fault for the accident. For example, if an injured party is found to be 20% at fault for a rear-end accident, they can only recover 80% of their damages.

The following are some key points to consider about comparative negligence and rear-end accident claims:

1. The burden of proof

In a comparative negligence case, the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that the injured party was partially at fault for the accident.

2. Apportionment of fault

The court will apportion fault among the parties based on the evidence presented at trial. Factors that may be considered include:

The relative speed of the vehicles involved
The distance between the vehicles
The actions of the drivers involved
Any applicable traffic laws

3. Multiple parties

There may be multiple parties at fault for a rear-end accident, including the driver of the rear vehicle, the driver of the lead vehicle, and any other drivers or pedestrians involved.

4. Contributory negligence

In some states, such as Alabama, contributory negligence bars an injured party from recovering any compensation if they are found to be even 1% at fault for the accident.

5. Comparative negligence and insurance

Many insurance policies contain provisions that address comparative negligence. These provisions can vary, so it is important to review your policy carefully.

6. Settlements

Settlements can be reached in comparative negligence cases, even if the parties disagree on the apportionment of fault.

7. Trial

If a settlement cannot be reached, the case will go to trial. The jury will be instructed on the law of comparative negligence and will be required to apportion fault among the parties.

8. Damages

The amount of damages an injured party can recover will be reduced in proportion to their percentage of fault for the accident.

9. Comparative negligence and rear-end accidents

Rear-end accidents are one of the most common types of car accidents. In most cases, the driver of the rear vehicle is found to be at fault for the accident. However, there are some cases in which the lead vehicle may also be found to be at fault.

10. Comparative negligence and car insurance

Most car insurance policies provide coverage for bodily injury and property damage. In cases involving comparative negligence, the amount of compensation an injured party can recover from the at-fault driver’s insurance company will be reduced in proportion to their percentage of fault for the accident.

24. Colorado Comparative Negligence Law

Colorado follows a modified comparative negligence rule. Under this rule, an injured party can recover damages in a personal injury case even if they are found to be more than 50% at fault for the accident. However, their damages will be reduced in proportion to their percentage of fault.

Percentage of Fault	Amount of Compensation
0-49%	Full amount of damages
50-99%	Reduced amount of damages
100%	No compensation

For example, if an injured party is found to be 60% at fault for a rear-end accident, they can recover 40% of their damages from the at-fault driver’s insurance company.

The modified comparative negligence rule in Colorado encourages parties to settle their cases out of court. If a case goes to trial, the jury will be instructed on the law of comparative negligence and will be required to apportion fault among the parties.

Denver Rear-End Car Accident Attorneys: A Legal Guide

Rear-end car accidents are a common occurrence in Denver, resulting in various injuries and damages. If you’ve been involved in a rear-end collision, it’s crucial to seek legal representation from experienced Denver rear-end car accident attorneys. They will provide guidance, support, and advocate for your best interests throughout the legal process.

At reputable law firms in Denver, attorneys specializing in rear-end accidents offer comprehensive legal services. From investigating the accident to negotiating settlements or representing clients in court, they possess the knowledge and expertise to maximize your recovery.

By working with a skilled Denver rear-end car accident attorney, you can hold the negligent party accountable and secure compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other damages. Don’t hesitate to contact a reputable law firm today to schedule a consultation and discuss your legal options.