Sometimes negotiations decide the level of compensation that should be given to the person that has claimed to suffer a personal injury. At other times, a court order declares how much money the defendant owes to the plaintiff. In either case, arrangements must be made for delivery of the reward.
What happens after both sides have agreed on a settlement figure?
The Personal Injury Lawyer in Kitchener for the defendant prepares a release form and sends it to the claimant’s lawyer. That same lawyer reviews the release and sends it to the client/plaintiff. The plaintiff reads the release. If the claimant agrees with what has been stated in that particular document, then the claimant takes the release to the offices of a notary public. In that way, the release’s terms can be agreed to through notarization of the claimant’s signature.
The release’s terms remove the defendant’s insurance company from the need to provide compensation for any other reported damages. That insurance company declares completion of all necessary payments to the injured claimant.
What plans get made for the plaintiff’s reward if the case goes to trial?
If the plaintiff wins the court decision, then the defendant’s insurance company gets told to deliver the reward to the plaintiff. Unless that same insurance company lacks the funds for providing the requested reward, it usually honors the judge’s request.
Still, the defendant’s insurance company does have the right to seek an appeal. If the appeal is granted, there is another trial. If the second trial results in a win for the plaintiff, the process copies the one followed after a plaintiff has won the decision in an initial trial. If the judge for the second trial reverses the original decision, then the defendant does not owe the plaintiff any money, as compensation for damages. Yet the same judge has the ability to make one of 3 different decisions.
If the judge at the appeal trial does not approve of or reverse the decision made at the initial trial, then that same judge has the right to send the case back. That means that a traditional court trial must be held again, in an effort to arrive at a new decision.
The decision to send a case back does not mandate the making of any particular changes. It does require a stronger adherence to the rules of the court, during the making of the new decision. Indeed, failure to follow those rules closely enough can trigger the need for an appeal. Lawyers must follow those rules while advocating for their clients. Lawyers cannot ignore those particular rules, in order to defeat the opponent’s case. An effort to try that approach could result in the filing of an appeal.