Car accident cases can be highly complex and cause much contention. If a dispute arises from an accident, such as how the accident happened, liability, or the value of a claim, and that cannot be resolved, then a lawyer on behalf of the injured person would file a complaint. If the complaint is filed in the District of Columbia, it’s filed in Superior Court. Roger Gelb, an experienced car accident attorney, could help with all elements of a car accident claim. He can walk you through the car accident trial process in DC and help you seek compensation for your injuries.
When a trial or case goes to trial, each side is permitted to give an opening statement; although not required to, the plaintiff goes first. That is because the plaintiff has the burden of proof so that the defendant may provide an opening statement, and then the plaintiff can rebut the defendant’s opening statement.
The car accident trial process ends in DC with closing statements. Like the opening statement, either side can give a closing statement, although it is not required. A closing statement is an argument and not necessarily proof. Both present the closing statement. Because the burden is on the plaintiff, he will deliver the closing arguments first, then the defense after there is a short rebuttable by the plaintiff side if they would like.
The car accident trial process in DC can be slightly different when multiple defendants exist. Various defendants are involved in a case for a variety of reasons. There may be more than one person or entity at fault in an accident case. On the other hand, there may be more than one party at fault in an accident case. For example, a person could be stopped and rear-ended in a car accident.
That vehicle that rear-ended the injured party may be rear-ended and then pushed into the car, causing a second impact. In that case, there are two defendants. Both of them are at fault presumably equally, although depending on the amount of damage and the extensive damage in both collisions. It would be up to a finder of fact, the judge, or a jury to determine if the defendants should split the judgment.
A typical trial on an automobile accident case with soft tissue injuries, meaning no broken bones, no scarring, and no surgery, the trial itself is typically two days. The judge would set aside their calendar to allow time to try the case. The first day is picking the jury and deciding whether it is a jury trial. That process is known as voir dire.
The second half of the first day may involve opening statements and some direct examinations. The second day would be the balance of the direct examinations, cross-examinations, and closing arguments, and then time for the jury to deliberate about the case, which could extend into the third day, of course, or even longer. Still, typically, it should last up to that.
Sometimes, more than one person can be at fault for a plaintiff’s injuries in a vehicle collision. This could occur if multiple defendants were distracted, intoxicated, or blatantly disregarding traffic rules. It is also possible for an initial vehicle to crash into the plaintiff’s car, throwing them from their car. If the plaintiff was on the ground and struck by a secondary vehicle, that could be an example of multiple people responsible for the plaintiff’s injuries.
If you are involved in a Washington, DC, car accident trial with multiple defendants, call a skilled auto crash attorney at Gelb & Gelb, P.C. now. A well-versed auto wreck trial attorney could help you file for the compensation you deserve.
No matter how many defendants are listed in a claim, a dedicated attorney’s responsibility is to represent the injured plaintiff. If there is more than one defendant in a Washington DC motor vehicle collision case, a diligent attorney will focus on representing the injured plaintiff. This means that if Roger Gelb’s presentation only pertains to the plaintiff’s injuries, then the fact that there are multiple defendants is irrelevant.
Presenting a case would simply be a matter of determining the plaintiff’s injuries, what they were caused by, and if they are related to the wreck. Determining that different people in the accident caused the injuries could result in the claimant receiving compensation from more than one person. Subsequently, if the injuries are linked to the collision, the ensuing medical bills and damages are also linked.
If the plaintiff named multiple defendants in their claim because they were unsure who caused their injuries, their attorney could not provide evidence proving a responsible party. Because of this, it is better to be safe than sorry and file against all potentially responsible parties rather than not suing anyone. That way, if one or more of the named defendants are proven guilty, the claimant could receive the compensation they deserve.
Because the main goal of a Washington DC auto wreck attorney at Gelb & Gelb, P.C. is to represent the claimant, having more than one defendant does not substantially impact the trial. It may only extend the duration of the trial and deliberation process. Other than that, the fact there are multiple defendants is not necessarily overly complicated.
Any health-care-related records obtained before a case goes to trial are available to the court if the plaintiff had previously released that information during the case. Although medical documents are confidential, healthcare privacy laws would apply if the claimant allowed them to be released. The fact that multiple defendants are in a case does not alter the legality of releasing medical documents.
If anyone has questions about how healthcare privacy laws operate in automobile crash cases with multiple defendants, an attorney could help.
A plaintiff’s attorney accident lawyer would have the expert witness testify about the plaintiff’s injuries to have a jury or a judge better understand the extent of the injuries, the necessity of the treatment, and the reasonableness of the medical bills. The expert would also discuss – if it’s a medical expert would also discuss whether or not there’s any permanent injury. Of course, the defense would have their expert, which could contradict the plaintiff’s expert.
It meets the client’s burden of proof to show that, again, in the case of a medical expert to show that the treatment that was rendered was reasonable and necessary, and again, whether or not there’s a permanent injury, it would be up to an expert to testify about that permanency. A skilled car accident attorney could determine what type of expert would be useful in your case. Reach out to learn about the various types of expert witnesses in DC car accident cases.
An expert witness is somebody qualified as an expert by the court. If the claimant is injured in an accident, the attorney must consider which type of expert would be needed in the case and accepted by the courts. To do that, the attorney has to ask the expert witness questions about their education, their occupation, how long they have had the job, and whether they have testified in this capacity or the capacity of an expert. The defense would be entitled to cross-examine the expert’s status and training. The defense could accept the expert as an expert without getting into the qualifications.
The two types of expert witnesses that would most typically be involved in an accident case would be medical testimony, experts regarding the claimant’s medical injuries, and experts regarding liability or who is at fault in an accident. Medical experts would include medical doctors and other medical personnel. Liability experts would consist of accident reconstruction experts and expert testimony; if a witness is qualified and accepted as an expert by the court, that expert is entitled to provide an opinion, and other witnesses are not.
As you go through the car accident trial process in DC, you may notice that the expert witness has an existing relationship with the plaintiff’s counsel or the client. The expert witness can have an existing relationship with the injured claimant. Usually, an expert witness in the medical capacity is a treating physician, although not always. It is not a problem that they have a previous relationship.
The weight of expert witnesses in a case can vary between cases, and how much weight an expert’s testimony is given would depend on the expert. Additionally, the weight of testimony may depend on how the expert testified and how the judge or the jury received that expert testimony.
Insurance companies typically rely on a small group of orthopedic surgeons in a plaintiff’s accident to testify about my client’s injuries. These small groups of doctors who testify on a regular basis at trials and depositions involving personal injury in the District of Columbia are paid a great deal of money by these insurance companies to come and testify on a regular basis. Fortunately, expert witnesses could also help the injured claimant in a car accident case. You should contact a knowledgeable car accident attorney to learn how expert witnesses could help your case.
Only some court cases go according to plan. The claimant may be eligible to appeal their court case in certain situations. The plaintiff can generally only appeal a case if there was a mistake of law at the trial level. So, if the plaintiff does not like a finding of fact and determination by the jury or the judge about who is at fault, how bad the injuries were, or the value of the case, that is likely unappealable. Appealing a DC car accident case requires following the letter of the law. Understand that it is not easy to make it to the appellate level.
There is no requirement that the appellate level grant us further review. This means they can reject our appeal, and we will not even get to be heard at the second level. Having said that, our DC car accident lawyers understand what it takes to get to that level and can leverage the information in your case to give you the best chance possible. If there is a mistake of law by the trial judge, an error about a jury instruction, or a potential juror should not have been stricken, we can file an appeal. But that would be the only way to appeal the mistake of law, not that they can file an error of fact. If you need help with a car accident case, please feel free to seek experienced legal help. Reach out to learn the nuances of appealing a DC car accident case.
Here, we discuss three of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals’s most important standards of review.
When your appeal is regarding a matter of law, the appellate court may substitute its judgment for that of the trial judge. This is called a de novo review. In Latin, de novo means anew. An appellate court hearing a case de novo will refer to the lower court’s record of the facts. This means we generally cannot introduce any new facts at the appellate level. Instead, we must work with what we have in the record and will refer to different parts in the record throughout the case.
This is why the court reporter is so important at the trial level. The Court of Appeals in DC will rule on the evidence and matters of law without deferring to that court’s findings in a de novo review. However, this form of review is uncommon as it requires more resources from the courts and places less deference on the trial court’s findings.
In rare instances, you can appeal the factual findings of your case from the trial court. However, the standard is a difficult one to meet. The standard is clearly erroneous. For an appeal to be successful in a clearly erroneous review, the appellate court must determine that a finding is unsupported by substantial, credible evidence in the record to meet this standard. For example, Rule 52(a)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a District Court’s finding of fact not be set aside unless clearly erroneous in an action tried on the facts without a jury. This is because it is generally not the job of the appellate level to weigh the evidence. Their job as a panel of judges is to discuss precedent and how your case fits with the settled law in Washington, DC.
Many decisions a judge makes in the DC Superior Court are discretionary. For example, it is up to a judge’s discretion to admit evidence. You may wish to bring this up when appealing a DC car accident case. A decision will not be overturned on an abuse of discretion standard unless the Court of Appeals determines that the lower court’s ruling was made without an appropriate basis.
You have 35 days from the date the judgment or order is filed at the trial level. Thus, when appealing a DC car accident case, it is essential to act quickly, or you may lose your ability to appeal to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
An appeal would not affect the value of the amount of damages recovered. For example, if there is a case in which a plaintiff’s case is dismissed, and the plaintiff filed no recovery at the trial court level, an appeal in the case, and the dismissal was reversed. The trial court was reversed, and the case was eventually tried; the value must still be determined. It is unlikely that it would be changed at the appellate level.
However, there are some rare examples of enormous judgments, meaning the plaintiff recovered a lot of money, which has been reduced on appeal. In those cases, the case would likely be sent back to the trial level to get an amount that the appellate court thinks is more reasonable.
After a trial, there is only a certain amount of time to file an appeal. The claimant would need to file the appeal once there’s a determination that a mistake was made at the trial court level. As long as the appeal is filed promptly, they would have their crack at briefly explaining why the appeal was being made, but there would only be one appeal. If the case is in certain jurisdictions, once they file an appeal and that appeal is denied or lost, they may be able to appeal to the next highest court. In the District of Columbia, there is only one appeals court, just the Court of Appeals.
If the appeal is lost and there are no additional appellate court-level appeals, the trial court’s determination is final. In Washington, DC, the Superior Court represents the trial level. Then, there is the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Thus, there are two levels of courts in DC.
The most crucial factor in any case is liability. The plaintiff and their attorney are burdened to show that somebody else is negligent and thus liable for causing their injuries in an auto accident case. Once they establish a liability, they have to offer the damages sustained by the plaintiff. A seasoned attorney at Gelb & Gelb P.C. could help make this process easier. They could handle every legal element of your claim and help you get compensation. Schedule a consultation to learn more about car accident trials in DC.
Gelb & Gelb, P.C.
N/a
Copyright © 2025 Gelb & Gelb, P.C. All rights reserved.