En VIDÉO.- La faculté des sciences humaines est maintenant sous le contrôle de la PNH. Pour l’instant aucune information n’est encore recueillie. Veuillez regardez la vidéo ci-dessous.
— Promoted content
What is the Empty Chair Defense in a Personal Injury Lawsuit?
If you’re bringing a claim for recovery for your injuries, you may hear of or encounter the empty chair defense. It’s important to familiarize yourself with some possible arguments the other side may use to get out of paying you the full compensation you deserve.
The empty chair defense attempts to place the blame on someone who isn’t a party to the lawsuit. Nevada allows the empty chair defense, but there are some critical limitations. Even with these restrictions, you may encounter this argument at trial, so it’s essential to prepare for the possibility. Here’s what you need to know about the empty chair defense in a personal injury lawsuit.
What Is the Empty Chair Defense?
The empty chair defense is a common strategy in injury cases. The most basic explanation of the empty chair defense is to blame someone who is not a party to the case. When a defendant raises the empty chair defense in a Nevada courtroom, they’re trying to convince the jury that a third party is entirely to blame for the plaintiff’s losses.
Under Nevada law, this defense is allowed with some rules and limitations. A defendant who uses the argument wants to deflect the jury’s criticism and place blame on a party who isn’t there to speak for themselves. https://www.askadamskutner.com/personal-injury/empty-chair-defense-personal-injury-lawsuit/