It is not always all so clear when it comes to cases involving the death of a pedestrian from a motor vehicle accident. It is not uncommon for theses cases to turn into death lawsuit. A fair number of these cases involve factors like complex claims that insurance companies will defend and not at all simple medical and accident reconstruction.
In most cases the insurance company adjustors will propose a settlement. However, this settlement will not be based on the victim's damages but on the possible financial risk faced by insurance company. On the other hand, there are various ways in which insurance companies can limit their risk. For instance, these cases usually involve things like denials of liability by the defendants and the insurance companies insuring the defendants, insurance issues that include things like the unavailability of insurance or under-insurance, economic and non-economic issues that hugely influence the worth of the case. This is why it is important that the lawyer who handles such a case possesses sufficient experience and skill.
A witness saw a car speeding around 6:00 am that hit a pedestrian somewhat after that time. The police who investigated discovered that the vehicle was speeding some time before the hit, that it was low on break fluid and that had a dirty windshield, which affected the driver's ability to see clearly, but no cleaning fluid for the windshield. The victim was a 66 year old woman who was thrown 27 feet from the place of the hit. She ended up with fractures to her ankle, skull, several ribs and the clavicle. The woman died in the hospital from the injuries and she left behind a husband, five children and six grandchildren. The settlement was reached for $725,000. Another example
In this case a woman was driving early in the morning and she took off after hitting a male pedestrian. The pedestrian had a part-time job and two children. He did not live. The police found the woman driver and charged her and the settlement was reached on $1.15 million by the law firm that represented the family of the victim.
There are some obvious differences in these cases. The second victim had a part-time job while the first report does not mention any job and the woman was probably retired. In the second case a person does not know whether the children were minors or not. These differences resulted in the 53% greater amount that was gained in the second case.