|
Home- Hawaii Accident Lawyer
General Info
What is a Personal Injury Claim? (basic)
Do I Need an Accident Lawyer?
Finding an Accident Lawyer
Get Legal Help at Hawaii Accident Lawyer

American Trial Lawyers Association

Consumer Lawyers Hawaii

Stanford Law School

American Bar Association

Marquis' Who's Who in the World, Who's Who in America and Who's Who in American Law
Sister sites:
Accident Lawyer Hawaii Attorney -
Car Accident Lawyer Hawaii -
Injury Lawyer Attorney Hawaii -
|
|
|
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Personal Injury Attorneys and Car Accident Lawyers Links
- Pennsylvania Truck Accident Lawyers
Pennsylvania lawyer attorney firm lawyer attorney real estate planning workers' compensation family divorce law criminal defense cases truck accident cases.
-
Personal Injury Christian Lawyer Attorney- Lowenthal & Abrams- Pennsylvania
Christian law firm- Lowenthal & Abrams- concentrating in personal injury, auto accidents, medical malpractice, churches and religious corporations in Pennsylvania.
-
Medical Malpractice - Cerebral Palsy - Birth Defects - Personal Injury - Donald L. Reihart, Esquire
Law office concentrating in medical malpractice, legal malpractice, personal injury, birth defects, cerbral palsy, child injuries.
-
Medical Malpractice Negligence Attorney Harrisburg Pennsylvania Lawyer- Navitsky, Olson & Wisneski LLP
Navitsky, Olson & Wisneski LLP, law firm located in Harrisburg Pennsylvania - medical malpractice, hospital negligence, nursing home neglect and automobile accidents.
|
|

Hawaii Accident Lawyer
William Lawson, Esq.
Century Square
1188 Bishop St. Suite 2902
Honolulu, HI 96813
New client hotline:
(808) 524-5300
Main business phone:
(808) 528-2525

U.S. Accident Lawyers and Personal Injury Law Firms
U.S. Personal Injury Attorney Directory and Legal Resources
Recent Personal Injury and Car Accident News
A "magic words" distinction has been developing in the Courts in the State of Hawaii which can affect the admissibility of evidence of prior accidents. Arguing that a prior accident put a defendant on notice of a foreseeable risk of harm seems to allow a broader range of proof than claiming that it showed a "dangerous condition". If the proof is offered to show a "dangerous condition", then proof of "substantial similarity" may be required. But if the evidence is offered to show that the prior accident should have attracted the defendant’s attention to something that could be dangerous, there seems to be a lower burden of similarity required. See, Estate of Klink v. State, 113 Haw 332 (2007), Gump v. Wal-Mart Stores, 93 Hawai'i 428, 449, 5 P.3d 418, 439 (App. 1999), affirmed 93 Hawai'i 417, 5 P.3d 407 (2000).
|