I broke/fractured my toe. How much should I settle for?

Assessment of damages in a personal injury case requires detailed analysis of liability, the injuries, and the effect of those injuries upon the individual. This analysis includes application of legal principles, evidentiary factors, medical documentation, out of pocket expenses, calculation of future losses and experience in your jurisdiction as to likely range of prospective jury awards. A "cookie-cutter" approach, a standard answer or a formula would be a disservice to someone such as yourself, who needs the help of an experienced personal injury lawyer. You state that you have a "broken toe" but you don't say which one, or how broken it is, or what the extent of your treatment was, etc. To answer the question properly, one would need extensive examination of all the evidence, particularly the medical records. Many people use this site to ask what their case is worth. Our answers are always: Get in touch with a personal injury lawyer in your area. That is the best way to get the best result in your case.

You don't give enough info about how the accident happened and why it was the grocery store's fault, nor your injuries for this question to be answered. Consult a personal inj lawyer.

I don't think you have a case. I think it was your fault.

It depends on a lot of factors. First being, whose fault was it. If no one else was at fault, you have no case. If it was another customer, do they have assets from which you can collect a judgment. If the store is at fault then obviously a judgment would be collectable. The second question is how much are your medical bills and lost wages if any. The third question is what type permanent impairment will you have, if any, from your injury. Below are some factors to consider: I am often asked by individuals who have been injured in an accident to give an opinion as to what would be a fair settlement in their case. Often, they give me a brief description of their injury, such as, I suffered two broken ribs, or I am now suffering back pain, or I hurt my leg and had to have surgery and give no further details. I cannot possibly give an opinion as to the value of their case without more information. I find myself repeating over and over some of the information set out below. The information below is an attempt to shed some light on what an accident injury victim should consider in determining a fair settlement. However, presenting damages to an insurance adjuster, and ultimately to a jury, is an advanced and complicated task. It not adequate to simply say I'm hurt , describe your injury, and then hold out your hand and ask for money. I have practiced law since 1985, and still attend seminars and read books on the subject of presenting personal injury damage claims to juries. The information below will not be enough to make you a personal injury attorney, but hopefully will enlighten you regarding some factors that should be considered on evaluating your claim. Maximum Medical Improvment First, one needs to understand the concept of Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI). MMI is the point at which the condition of an injured person is stabilized. No further recovery or improvement is expected even with additional medical intervention. Basically, a condition is at maximum medical improvement if it is not believed that the condition will change or progress. In laymen's terms, this is often referred to a being released by the doctor. This term is most often used in the context of a worker's compensation claim. An inquired employee usually receives temporary benefits until reaching maximum medical improvement. However, it also has significance in general personal injury cases. Insurers for at fault drivers, manufacturers of unsafe products, owners and operators of unsafe premises, and doctors guilty of malpractice do not normally make incremental payments as medical bills and lost wages are incurred. Rather, these insurers normally settle claims with one payments, which represents the final settlement. For this reason, the accident victim must have evidence of all past and future damages to present to the adjuster. This means it is premature to begin evaluating your claim before you reach MMI because you do not yet know how much your medical bills will be, nor do you know how severe the injury will ultimately be - which is the main factor in damages for pain and suffering until after you have reached MMI. After you have reached MMI, four basic factors that should be considered in evaluating your case are 1) special damages, also known as tangible damages, 2) severity of the injury, 3) duration of the injury, and 4) insurance coverage. Special Damages Special damages which are also sometimes called tangible damages include the cost of medical treatment (medical bills) and lost wages. Special damages are somewhat objective and easily ascertainable. You simply add up your medical bills and determine what wages you would have earned had you not been out of work due to your injury. The insurance adjuster or opposing attorney may quibble over some of your numbers, claiming that you have been overcharged by your doctor, or that some medical procedures that you are including in damages were no

How about starting with the idea you have to prove negligence on the part of the owner of the cart, and no negligence on your part. Then what are your bills? what do the doctors say? What is the extent of your injury? Doesn't sound like much of a case, but it might be. See a good PI lawyer

Probably the cost of the doctor bills and a couple of hundred for pain and injury. Any more than that and they will start raising your comparative negligence.

If I were you I'd settle for a fair and reasonable amount based on the expense, pain/suffering, wage loss while taking into consideration any comparative fault. It took me 30 years to figure out what that means and so I suspect by the time you figure it out the statute of limitations will have expired as will your claim. On the other hand you could hire a personal injury lawyer to help you. Where do people get the idea the practice of law is easy enough for them to DIY?