Researching a Personal Injury Question

After an injury, people search for answers to questions that feel simple: is there a claim, against whom, how long is there to act, what is it worth. Each depends on the law of a particular place applied to particular facts, and the honest research answer to all four is that it depends, and here is where to look. This page sets the questions out in an order that keeps them apart. It gives no deadlines, values or predictions, because none can be stated responsibly for a reader whose facts and jurisdiction are unknown.

What "personal injury" covers

In Cornell's definition, personal injury is broader than bodily harm: it covers injury to a person's body, emotions or reputation, as distinct from injury to property rights^S12. The same entry gives non-bodily examples, among them intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and invasion of privacy^S12. So the first research task is to describe the harm accurately, without assuming it is physical.

The entry names three grounds on which such claims are brought: negligence, which it calls the most common basis, strict liability, and intentional wrongs^S12. Those are the general tort categories^S10, explained in the tort law guide. Cornell's editors last reviewed the personal injury entry in July 2020^S12. Treat it as a starting vocabulary, not a statement of current law anywhere.

Five questions, kept apart

Injury research goes wrong when questions answered by different sources are merged. Keep five apart. The harm: what happened, to whom, and what loss followed. The forum and the law: record separately which courts could hear the matter and which jurisdiction's law may decide it; do not assume the answers coincide. The theory: which cause of action fits, such as negligence, an intentional wrong or strict liability^S12. The proof: what evidence would establish each part of that theory. The remedy: what the governing law allows a successful claimant to recover.

A California court self-help page, used here only as an illustration of these distinctions, separates the same pieces: the cause of action as the legal reason to sue, the evidence that supports it, and the losses claimed^S13. It adds that a claimant must prove every part of the cause of action chosen, and that a workplace injury may involve a workers' compensation claim as well as a separate claim against whoever caused it^S13. Those points describe California's guidance. Its forms, venues and time limits apply in California only and must not be carried into Texas or anywhere else.

Proof and the research record

Evidence and legal research feed each other. The California page lists kinds of evidence a claimant might keep, among them photographs, medical bills or doctors' reports, witness statements and police reports, and notes that a court has rules about what evidence it can consider^S13. Which rules apply is a procedural question for the governing jurisdiction.

Keep a research record beside the factual one: each source consulted, its version or revision date, the date you read it, and which question it answered. That record is what lets a lawyer, or you at a later date, check the work rather than repeat it.

Remedies and time limits are research topics, not promises

Cornell lists categories of damages a successful claimant may be awarded, including medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, mental and emotional distress, household assistance and travel expenses^S12. Whether any of them is available, how it is measured and whether it is limited depends on the governing law and the facts. This guide states no amounts, caps or typical values.

Time limits work the same way. Whether and when a claim must be filed is a question for the governing jurisdiction's current statutes and decisions. This page states no time limit for any jurisdiction, and a figure found on a general page should never be relied on without checking the governing source.

Research steps, in order

1. Write down the harm and the dates. Plain facts first: what happened, when and where, and what loss followed, whether bodily, emotional or to reputation^S12.
2. Identify the possible forums and the governing law. Note where the events occurred and where the parties are. For a Texas matter start with the Texas guide; for federal sources, the United States guide.
3. Name candidate theories. Negligence, strict liability, an intentional wrong, or a non-bodily tort such as defamation^S12S10.
4. Break each theory into questions. For negligence: duty, breach, harm and the two kinds of causation, answered from the jurisdiction's own authority^S11.
5. Research procedure and time limits on their own. Use the governing jurisdiction's statutes, rules and court resources, never another state's.
6. Research remedies last. Find what the governing law permits and how it is measured, recording the source and date for each point.

Common traps

• Reading a figure from a general article, or from another state's court page, as the time limit for your matter.
• Assuming "personal injury" means bodily injury only^S12.
• Confusing evidence, which proves facts, with the cause of action, which is the legal reason to sue^S13.
• Treating a list of damages categories as an entitlement^S12.
• Applying a California self-help page outside California^S13.

Related reading on this site

• Researching tort lawThe categories of civil wrong and the order of sources behind them.
• Researching Texas lawCodes, courts and library guides for a Texas question.
• Researching United States lawFederal statutes, regulations, courts and case records.
• Comparing tort law across systemsWhen the injury or the parties cross a border.

This guide is general research information. It does not evaluate any injury, claim, time limit or value, it creates no lawyer and client relationship, and it is not legal advice. For a real matter, the governing jurisdiction's current law and a lawyer qualified there are the sources that count.

Sources checked 2026-10-03. 4 sources cited on this page.