1 UPDATES AND DEVELOPMENTS ON DEFENDING LOW-IMPACT ACCIDENT CLAIMS Matthew J. Smith, Esq. CINCINNATI, OH COLUMBUS, OH DETROIT, MI FT. MITCHELL, KY ORLANDO, FL SARASOTA, FL 1
2 I. Introduction For many years as an insurance defense attorney, I have heard insurers complain about the ever-increasing number of lawsuits, proliferation of attorneys and presentation of questionable claims. In like manner, everyone in the insurance industry knows the payout of indemnity dollars has increased dramatically over the past several decades. It is easy to point fingers as to who is to blame for these developments. Frequently we accuse overly zealous plaintiffs attorneys, questionable medical providers, telemarketers, judges unwilling to dismiss frivolous cases and juries for awarding unrealistic damages. In the appropriate case any, or all, of these criticisms may be appropriate. To find the real culprit, however, regarding the proliferation of insurance claims over the past twenty-five years, we really need look no further than in the mirror. When I began practice as a young attorney in central Florida in the mid-1980s, the average nuisance value for a claim settlement was five hundred dollars. Recently, I had a judge advise me any amount below ten thousand dollars was nothing more than nuisance value to the insurance company to be rid of a lawsuit. Although that judge s figure still rings far too high, in this era a nuisance value settlement is generally in the range of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00). No matter the condition of the economy or inflation, such a dramatic increase in only twenty years is unheard of. The reason this increase has taken place is simply because the insurance industry, for far too many years, was willing to pay questionable and unmeritorious claims simply for nuisance value to avoid litigation or settle cases rather than proceeding to trial. A five hundred dollar settlement became a seven hundred fifty dollar settlement, which in turn became a thousand dollar settlement, and the spiral continued, with no end in sight. Fortunately, our industry began to realize the error of its ways approximately ten years ago and began more aggressively addressing questionable claims and especially those involving minor impacts. The MIST (Minor Impact/Soft Tissue) analysis of claims began. The result, in the past ten years or more, has actually been quite dramatic, when viewed statistically, reducing not only the number of claims arising from minorimpact collisions but also driving jury verdicts substantially lower in many jurisdictions for auto-related claims. In this program, we will not look backwards, however, but instead look forward to the future for defense activities regarding these claims and recent developments in Ohio, and other jurisdictions, which allow insurers the opportunity to not only thoroughly investigate but even more aggressively defend these types of cases. This is not to say there are not some road blocks along the way and issues you must be aware of in handling and defending questionable minor-impact claims. We will address these issues, hopefully providing you with greater insight into how to identify, defend and resolve successfully claims of a questionable nature involving minor-impact collisions. 1
3 II. The Need for Individual Analysis You may think it odd I would begin with this issue in a program focusing on new trends in defending soft-tissue and minimal-impact cases. Nevertheless, I think in any analysis of these types of claims, the most important thing to address at all levels, from the initial claim-handler, through claims-management and even to defense counsel, is the need to individually view and assess each claim. Some insurers have gotten themselves in trouble by aggressively defending every case where a minimal impact has occurred. The reality is minimal impacts can, and do, cause injury. There are accepted scientific studies showing impacts of less than five miles per hour are capable of inflicting permanent injury. Something to consider is frequently we in defense of claims, utilize the statistic something as minor as a sneeze or stepping from a curb can cause a disc rupture or herniation. This is one of the longest-used arguments in countering disc-herniation injuries in litigation. If, however, that is true, how can we then turn around and claim no one could ever be injured from a minor-impact rear-end collision? The reality is stereotyping never has a good result, no matter what its application. Because of this, we must carefully make certain each file is reviewed fairly and impartially. One of the things I have learned in more than ten years of investigating medical and insurance fraud claims is sometimes there are true injuries and logical explanations, even for what appears on the surface to be highly questionable, if not fraudulent, activity. The minute we begin assuming every minimal-impact accident claimant is lying or simply seeking financial gain, is the day we will all be doing an extreme disservice to our companies and our insureds. Although you need to train all of your staff personnel to aggressively identify, investigate and defend these types of claims, please remember to always do so with the underlying assumption the claim and injury are valid until the investigation proves otherwise. III. Jury Trends If you want to know whether this type of claim investigation is paying off, you need look no further than jury verdict analysis. Even in Cuyahoga County, judges and attorneys have reported a dramatic decrease in the average jury verdict on soft-tissue injury claims in the past decade. I have actually been told by more than a few plaintiffs attorneys in northern Ohio they have expanded their advertising and marketing activities into southern Ohio and even begun new areas of practice because of the minimal value of questionable soft-tissue injury claims and the more aggressive stance being taken by insurers in defending those claims. 2
4 Like anyone else who has actual experience trying cases before juries, we can all tell our horror stories of jury verdicts which defy reason. The reality, however, is the vast majority of jury verdicts are fair and based upon reasoned understanding of the case. In my opinion, this is the reason why aggressive defense of minimal-impact collision claims has been so successful. When jurors see the photographs, hear the testimony, and are allowed to view the damage estimates, it becomes clear to them the injuries are highly questionable and the real motive behind the injury may well be for financial or insurance gain. Criticize the jury system as we might, our legal system is still the best ever developed in human history. I remain convinced if we give jurors accurate and complete information they will normally reach the correct decision. The results shown throughout the insurance industry in defending these types of cases through successful jury trials demonstrate this is not simply theory but is reality. IV. Use of Photographic Evidence There have probably never been any type of litigated files where the old adage, A photo is worth a thousand words, is more appropriate than in defending MIST claims. Photographs taken as soon as possible following the accident showing minimal or no damage to either vehicle are frequently the deciding factor juries rely upon when we speak with them years later, following a successful jury verdict. The important thing is to secure high-quality photographs clearly establishing little or no damage was done to either vehicle. Historically, insurance companies have been notorious for only photographing vehicles where property damage is being claimed. Although this may make perfect sense from a property damage standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense from a bodily injury defense standpoint. Especially in a rear-end collision, frequently the insured vehicle is going to sustain more damage than the claimant s vehicle. If the claimant s vehicle has no visible damage but the person submits an injury claim, it is even more important to document the lack of physical damage to their vehicle. I frequently also receive files where only one or two photographs of the vehicles are provided and those photographs are taken from such a distance or angle as to render their use at trial virtually worthless. Especially in the age of digital photography, there is no justifiable reason why multiple and clear photographs from virtually every angle of both vehicles cannot be secured. Oftentimes it is also important to photograph portions of the vehicle other than simply the rear bumper. For example, I have had claimants allege damage was actually done to the rear quarter-panel of the vehicle, even though the rear bumper sustained zero damage. Although I question the accuracy of such an allegation, without having a photograph of the side of the vehicle to prove them wrong, this testimony is still going to 3
5 be heard by a jury and could be believed. A simple series of photographs showing no damage to the side of the vehicle would have solved this problem fully. Also consider whether photographic evidence of the undercarriage of the vehicle is warranted. Especially on vehicles with compaction bumpers, sometimes photographs can be taken showing little or no compaction of the shock absorber on the bumper has occurred. As is addressed subsequently in this presentation, one of the things you may want to consider is to have an auto-body specialist train your adjusters on what specific evidence and photographs to consider in defending MIST type of accident claims. Before leaving the area of photographic evidence, however, I do want to bring one potential problem area to your attention. At least two judges in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, have refused to allow photographs of vehicles into evidence in minor-impact cases without corresponding testimony from a biomechanical engineering expert. We will discuss subsequently in this program the use of biomechanical engineering experts. The first of these decisions was by Judge Nancy Russo, who held the photographs were nonreliable and extremely prejudicial, as injuries could occur even when no visible damage was apparent on the vehicle. Interestingly, my understanding is Judge Russo is a former SIU investigator with Allstate Insurance Company. Not all judges, even in Cuyahoga County, however, have adopted this same standard. Recently our firm tried a case in Cuyahoga County, and we were advised at the pretrial hearing the judge would not follow the decision of his two colleagues and was fully willing to admit photographic evidence, as long as it was undisputed the photos were taken of the vehicles in question, were taken following the occurrence of the accident and before any repairs to the vehicle were made. The important thing to understand is to make certain you, and your defense counsel, know fully the evidentiary standards of the judge to whom the case you are handling is assigned. You certainly do not want to find out at a final pretrial hearing, or at trial, the judge is striking the photographic evidence, if this is the evidence upon which the majority of your defense has been based. V. Body Shop Analysis I personally think this is one of the most overlooked aspects of investigating minor-impact collisions. Let me begin with a war story. Several years ago, I jury-tried a case in Warren County, which was in most respects your typical minor-impact collision. It occurred during rush hour, on a Friday night. My client s BMW had a small dent in the license plate, which may have been there previously from parking lot damage. The plaintiff s vehicle, at most, had a few scratches on the rear bumper of an older Ford Taurus. The plaintiff s vehicle had three occupants, a mother, father and teenage son. Interestingly, the parents were State Farm Insurance agents. 4
6 What made this case atypical, however, is the primary plaintiff was the female passenger. By the time the case got to trial, she had incurred more than three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00) of medical expenses related to five back surgeries. We secured a defense verdict on this case. Although I would like to tell you it was based upon excellent lawyering, at most I can take only partial credit. The plaintiffs in this case were difficult from the start. Although their Ford Taurus was approximately ten years old and, no doubt, had numerous scratches and other damage to the bumper well before this accident, the very smart claims adjuster who handled this file agreed with their request to have an entirely new bumper put on the rear of the car. This was an unnecessary expenditure by the insurance company of approximately six hundred dollars. What the plaintiffs did not know, however, was the adjuster agreed with the body shop to put a new bumper on the vehicle in exchange for the body shop giving him full possession and control of the bumper taken off the car. This was subsequently held as evidence until the lawsuit was filed. After litigation was instituted, we retained an expert and, on video camera, cut open the bumper, revealing none of the plastic waffle panels inside the bumper were damaged or deflected in any manner. We later played the video tape for the jury during the expert s trial testimony. As with any other case, the issue becomes the timeliness of collecting and preserving evidence. If you have a highly questionable claim, determine where the opposing vehicle is going to be repaired or the damage estimate prepared and speak promptly with the person who prepared the estimate or repaired the damage. If physical evidence such as the bumper, bumper shock absorbers or other material is available, secure that evidence for future use at trial. Keep in mind as well there are multiple types of experts who can testify before a jury. You do not always need a physician or biomechanical engineering expert on every soft-tissue injury case involving a minor impact. Your best-qualified expert may be an auto body repair specialist who can explain to the jury why there is no evidence of any damage done to the vehicle based upon the physical condition of the bumper and the surrounding support system. Recently our firm conducted a trial where we had the body damage specialist testify at trial, and he testified regarding the respective bumper heights of the plaintiff s and defendant s vehicles to demonstrate the minor impact which occurred could not in any respect have caused the damage alleged by the plaintiffs. The important thing about utilizing this type of body damage expert is to make certain you retain someone whose qualifications can withstand cross-examination and who can clearly present their testimony at trial. Much in the same manner as photographic evidence, you may also need to make certain the trial judge to whom your case is assigned will recognize and accept this type of expert witness testimony. It is the duty of your counsel to be able to adequately demonstrate to the court why the expert testimony is directly relevant to the case and why it meets the reliability and verifiability standards of the Daubert and Kumho Tire decisions from the United States Supreme Court. 5
7 VI. Use of Biomechanical Engineering Experts As noted above, there may be some cases where use of a biomechanical engineering expert is a requirement if you are going to introduce photographic evidence at trial. In other cases, you may voluntarily want to use a biomechanical engineer for purposes of emphasizing to the jury the minimal impact of the collision and the lack of scientific evidence to support any claim of injury. Biomechanics is generally defined as the analysis of the forces of impact on the human body. Although there are some medical doctors trained in the field of biomechanics, most biomechanical experts have an engineering background, combined with some additional study or degree in human anatomy. The primary scientific foundation of biomechanical engineering is simply the laws of physics. The idea is force is transferred through a vehicle, or some other mechanism, to the human body. The more intricate question then becomes what degree of force is required before any type of injury would reasonably be expected. Obviously, factors such as the physical condition, age and position of the person s body as well as the type of vehicles are all relevant to a biomechanical engineering analysis. Biomechanical engineers can be extremely effective in testifying to a jury regarding factors such as G forces, the transference of energy and the amount of physical impact (translated into miles per hour) which are required before a body can sustain a foreseeable injury. Information regarding the actual movement of the human body, spine and especially the cervical area can all be important factors which can be testified to through biomechanical engineering testimony. Especially with the advent of computer graphics and animation, the field of biomechanical engineering has become easier to translate to a jury through effective demonstrative exhibits and videos. Fortunately too, the costs for these type of demonstrative presentations has also decreased. As with any other expert, however, the key to effective use of a biomechanical engineer is not the person who has the best credentials, writes the best report or will handle the case for the lowest fee. All of these may be factors you consider, but to me as a trial attorney, the only important thing beyond the qualifications of the expert is the ability of that expert to effectively and clearly communicate their opinions to a jury. The most credible of experts is of little or no value if they cannot engage with and communicate to the jury the foundations, reasoning and reliability of their opinions. Deciding which case will merit the use of an expert witness such as a biomechanical engineer is an important analysis for you to consider in conjunction with your defense counsel. You will normally have the luxury of being able to retain the services of the biomechanical engineer even years after the occurrence of the accident, provided the initial investigation, photographic evidence, preservation of physical 6
8 evidence, if possible, as well as other proper investigation actions were undertaken in the early phases of the claim. VII. Use of the Seat Belt Defense Virtually every state has adopted a mandatory seat belt law. In most jurisdictions, the failure to use an available and operable seat belt is also admissible in defense of a personal injury claim arising from an automobile accident. This was not the case, however, until recently in the state of Ohio. Ohio Revised Code Section , however, has been amended to now permit limited use of the seat belt defense in court actions in Ohio. Specifically, the Ohio statute provides as follows:...the failure of a person to wear all of the available elements of a properly adjusted occupant restraining device or the failure of a person to ensure that each minor who is a passenger of an automobile being operated by that person is wearing all of the available elements of a properly adjusted occupant restraining device shall not be considered or used by the trier of fact in a tort action as evidence of negligence or contributory negligence. But, the trier of fact may determine based on evidence admitted consistent with the Ohio Rules of Evidence that the failure contributed to the harm alleged in the tort action and may diminish a recovery of compensatory damages that represent non-economic loss As is clearly noted, the important thing to understand is Ohio has adopted a standard where failure to use the seat belt is not a defense of contributory negligence but instead is a reduction of the amount of damages being claimed due to the failure to wear the seat belt. This is more complicated than in many other states. The simple effect of this is the seat belt argument can only be used to offset as a percentage of damage from a claim for pain and suffering or other non-economic damages and cannot be used as a defense to the accident itself or as an offset to damages for medical expenses or verifiable lost wages. Although the seat belt defense in Ohio is still relatively new, most courts are requiring the defendant establish first evidence the vehicle was equipped with an available and operable seat belt. This can be done in deposition testimony but should also be something which is reflected on the police report and which also should be asked in the initial recorded statement or interview being taken by the insurance company following the accident. The second thing the defendant must prove is the failure to wear the available and operable seat belt directly caused and contributed to the injuries being claimed. Again, most Ohio courts have not developed definitive rules regarding use of the seat belt defense at this time, however, most courts will in all probability require some type of 7
9 expert testimony be utilized to establish the relationship between the injury and the failure to wear an available and operable seat belt. In certain cases, such as facial scarring or a head injury caused by impacting with the windshield, expert testimony may not be required. However, in cases of a more minimal impact nature, in all probability many judges may require you to present some type of expert testimony to establish the failure to wear an available and operable seat belt was directly related to the injuries being claimed. Expert testimony regarding seat belt issues will predominantly come from biomechanical engineering experts, as noted above. Additionally, however, you may find certain orthopedic surgeons, especially if they have attended continuing medical education programs focused upon seat belt issues, are deemed by courts qualified to give expert testimony regarding the effect of not wearing a seat belt upon injury claims. This is something you, or your defense counsel, will need to address with the appropriate experts at time of retention of their services so you clearly identify the scope of the opinion you are asking them to address in any written report. VIII. The Ohio Collateral Source Law and Robinson v. Bates (2006) Much in the same manner as Ohio lagged behind many other jurisdictions in adopting a seat belt defense, Ohio courts have also taken a very pro-plaintiff standpoint regarding evidence of collateral sources being admissible at jury trials. Collateral sources are simply allowing the jury to hear information regarding health insurers or other parties actually paying the medical expenses being claimed by the plaintiff, rather than those persons actually having paid those expenses personally. Through tort reform, which has now been upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court as constitutional, Ohio now has a much more mainstream collateral source rule, allowing this type of information to be presented to a jury. The most recent Ohio tort reform act, which was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court, became law on April 7, At that time, Ohio s collateral source rule was amended to provide: 1. ORC Evidence of Benefits to Plaintiff from Collateral Sources (A) In any tort action, the defendant may introduce evidence of any amount payable as a benefit to the plaintiff as a result of the damages that result from an injury, death or lost to person or property that is the subject of the claim upon which the action is based, except if the source of collateral benefits has a mandatory self-effectuating federal right of subrogation, a contractual right of subrogation, or a statutory right of subrogation or if the source pays the plaintiff a benefit that is in the form of a life insurance payment or disability payment. However, evidence of the life insurance payment or disability 8
10 payment may be introduced if the plaintiff employer paid for the life insurance or disability policy, and the employer is a defendant in the tort action. (B) If the defendant elects to introduce evidence described in Division (A) of this section, the plaintiff may introduce evidence of any amount that the plaintiff has paid or contributed to secure the plaintiff s right to receive the benefits of which the defendant has introduced evidence. (C) A source of collateral benefits of which evidence is introduced pursuant to Division (A) of this section shall not recover any amount against the plaintiff nor shall it be subrogated to the rights of the plaintiff against the defendant. Although not as pro-defense as collateral source laws in other states, this 2005 version of Ohio s collateral source law does permit a jury to hear evidence of benefits being paid by collateral sources. One of the most dramatic effects of this tort reform provision was to force a plaintiff s counsel to name as involuntary plaintiffs or defendants the health care providers or other subrogated parties who have an interest in the case. As a defense lawyer, I actually welcome this process, as it allows us to present all of the evidence to the jury, including establishing the fact the plaintiff s medical expenses were paid by insurance, even if a right of subrogation payment does exist. This can only be claimed, however, if the health insurer is a party to the action. Perhaps more important than the tort reform act, however, was the 2006 decision from the Ohio Supreme Court in the case of Robinson v. Bates. This case was decided on December 20, 2006, and arose from an original case in Hamilton County, Ohio. Anyone who is a consumer of medical services with health insurance is well aware of the vast difference between the amount a medical provider bills and the amount actually accepted by that provider from health insurers for payment. This can literally be as dramatic as a ninety percent write-off between the amount billed and the amount actually accepted for payment. Until the Robinson decision, Ohio courts permitted the plaintiff to introduce the amount of medical expenses actually billed, even if the majority of those medical expenses were written off by the health care provider. This meant the plaintiff could claim the full amount of the bill, even though the plaintiff was never personally responsible for anywhere close to the amount shown on the bill and the bill had been paid in full for a much lower amount. The Robinson case dramatically changed Ohio law by holding both the original medical billed amount and the amount accepted as full payment by the health care provider are admissible before a jury to prove the reasonableness of the charges rendered for medical or hospital care. The Court further ruled the difference between the original medical bill and the amount actually accepted as payment in full is not a benefit as 9
11 defined under Ohio s collateral source rule and accordingly is fully admissible before the jury. The effect of the Robinson case on actual trials is the plaintiff may now introduce into evidence the original amount billed by the medical care provider, and the defendant then has the right to introduce before the jury evidence of the much lower amount which was actually accepted by the medical care provider as payment in full. When presented properly this allows the defense to actually present the true cost of the treatment to the jury, for this reason some plaintiff s attorneys will actually take this strategy away from the defense and introduce both sets of medical charges during their case. Regardless, once introduced, it is then up to the jury, after hearing both the original amount and the reduced amount accepted for payment, to determine what is the reasonable cost incurred for medical expenses for the injury being claimed. Although the initial reaction by many attorneys (both on the plaintiff side and the defense side) was this is a daunting task to present to a jury, in the few cases which have been tried since the Robinson decision the vast majority of the juries do seem to trend toward accepting the lower amount actually paid for the benefits, rather than the amount billed by the medical provider. My personal opinion is juries are more inclined to do so because they are well aware, from their own health insurance experience, of the actual amount submitted for payment by medical providers from health insurers being reduced. The net effect of the Robinson case is to allow the defense to present evidence to dramatically reduce the amount of medical expenses which were previously claimed by plaintiffs, thereby providing juries the option if they choose of awarding substantially lower damages. Both the Ohio collateral source law, as amended through tort reform, and the Robinson v. Bates case decided by the Ohio Supreme Court, are strong evidence of Ohio s return to a more moderate legislative and judicial standards in the past ten years. IX. Use of Background and Computer Search Reports We have never lived in an age where more data has been available regarding individuals and vehicles, than in the current age of the computer search. These can be extremely valuable tools in investigating questionable claims, including minor-impact collisions. Vehicle information is available from a number of sources regarding the history of a motor vehicle, prior collisions and repairs and other relevant information. Even car dealerships have remarkable information now available regarding service records on many vehicles. Some auto-repair shops have even begun taking digital photographs of vehicles to protect themselves from potential liability when a car is brought in for service. Most states have also updated their title laws in recent years regarding salvage and rebuilt vehicles. 10
12 It is now also easier than ever to access information regarding the prior owners of vehicles and question them regarding any preexisting damage or other information which may be relevant to the investigation of the claim. Quite simply, however, you will never gain access to this information, nor learn any of this information, unless you conduct the appropriate searches, locate this information and follow up as necessary. In like manner, an extensive amount of personal information is also available regarding claimants, witnesses and even medical providers. Information regarding prior claims history, litigation (including prior personal injury lawsuits) and other relevant background information is oftentimes only a computer search away. Do not overlook the internet and other search tools as extremely valuable in developing information on health care providers, expert witnesses and even attorneys. Everything from litigation histories to professional disciplinary actions may all be relevant to defense of a claim or lawsuit. Although it may not be universally true, our experience has been a number of the individuals involved in making personal injury claims for minor accidents oftentimes do have a prior claim history of auto injuries, premises liability claims or workers compensation claims. In the era of computer records, this information is more accessible than it has ever been at any time in the past to not only investigate claims but also impeach the credibility of a witness, either in deposition, examination under oath, or at trial. X. Conclusion Although this program has focused on new developments in the investigation of minor-impact collisions, the reality is the best way to investigate these claims, as in any other claim investigation, is simply good old-fashioned hard work. Nevertheless, there are new laws, court decisions and technologies which are available to assist you in the thorough and complete investigation of these type of claims. It is my hope the time we have spent together today, and these materials, will aid you and your company in investigations of any nature but especially in aggressively and successfully defending the minor-impact collisions in which so many injuries are claimed but remain highly questionable. 11
Impeaching the Spine Injury Medical Expert By Ernest P. Chiodo, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., M.S., M.B.A., C.I.H. Physician-Attorney-Biomedical Engineer It is a common error that an attorney retains the wrong type
February 15, 2016 Professional Practice 544 Tort Law and Insurance Michael J. Hanahan Schiff Hardin LLP 233 S. Wacker, Ste. 6600 Chicago, IL 60606 312-258-5701 firstname.lastname@example.org Schiff Hardin LLP.
CAR ACCIDENT GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction... 1 First Step... 1 Finding and Hiring a Lawyer... 1 Financial Arrangements... 2 Your Claim... 3 Documenting Your Claim... 5 Parties to the Claim...
I. ROBINSON V.BATES, 112 Ohio St.3d 17, 2006 Ohio 6362 (December 20, 2006). A. Landlord-tenant case In Hamilton County, Ohio, Plaintiff tenant sued her landlord for personal injuries caused when she broke
Do You Have a Case? Truck Accident ebooklet Andrew Miller 201 South 3rd Street Logansport, IN 46947 P: (574) 722-6676 www.starrausten.com Disclaimer No attempt is made to establish an attorney-client relationship
PERSONAL INJURY FACT BOOK - 1 - Firm Profile For over a decade, The Law Offices of Bruce M. Robinson have been dedicated to protecting the rights of victims who have been injured by the negligent and careless
THE TOP 10 QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK YOUR CAR ACCIDENT LAWYER? Introduction After six straight years of decline, the National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) reports that auto accidents, injuries
SUBROGATION THE RIGHT OF YOUR HEALTH INSURER TO BE PAID BACK WHEN YOUR CASE SETTLES Subrogation: the legal right of an insurance company to be paid back for benefits paid on your behalf after your accident.
Michigan Prepared by Cardelli Lanfear P.C. 322 West Lincoln Royal Oak, MI 48067 Tel: 248.850.2179 Fax: 248.544.1191 1. Introduction History of Tort Reform in Michigan Michigan was one of the first states
Ohio Motorcycle Accidents: The Attorney You Choose Impacts the Settlement or Verdict of Your Motorcycle Accident Case 1 Contents History of Success Makes a Difference... 2 Attorney Location is Important...
Securing the Evidence: Critical Steps in Investigation of a Crashworthiness Case By Joel S. Rosen, Esquire The initial investigation of a claim and collection of evidence related to that claim can often
FURR & HENSHAW 1900 Oak Street, P.O. Box 2909 Myrtle Beach, SC 29578 Phone: (843) 626-7621 and 1534 Blanding Street Columbia, SC 29201 Phone: (803) 252-4050 YOUR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT CASE The purpose of
EVALUATING THE LOW IMPACT AUTO CASE Dana G. Taunton BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C. Montgomery, Alabama 36104 I. INTRODUCTION Low impact auto cases may be simple or complex. A simple
Consumer Awareness How to Keep From Getting Ripped Off by Big Insurance Provided as an educational service by: Anthony D. Castelli, Esq. Concentration in Auto and Work Related Injuries (513) 621-2345 ATTENTION!!!
VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION CHAPTER 585 An Act to amend and reenact 38.2-2206 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 7 of Chapter 3 of Title 8.01 a
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 16TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA JENNIFER WINDISCH, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO: 2007-CA-1174-K JOHN SUNDIN, M.D., RHODA SMITH, M.D., LAURRAURI
Understanding your auto claim Filing a claim Immediately notify the police of an accident that damaged other s property or if you were the victim of a hitand-run accident, uninsured motorist, vandalism
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC02-2659 CYNTHIA CLEFF NORMAN, Petitioner, vs. TERRI LAMARRIA FARROW, Respondent. [June 24, 2004] WELLS, J. We have for review Norman v. Farrow, 832 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA
Personal Injury Wrongful Death Slip & Fall Automobile Accidents Trucking Accidents Motorcycle Accidents Medical Malpractice Criminal Defense Accident Injuries and Your Car Insurance Critical Details You
Personal Injury Litigation The Anatomy of a New York Personal Injury Lawsuit An ebook by Stuart DiMartini, Esq. 1325 Sixth Avenue, 27 th Floor New York, NY 10019 212-5181532 dimartinilaw.com Introduction
WHAT IS THE LAW SURROUNDING CAR ACCIDENTS? How Does The Law Determine Who s At Fault? When determining fault, there is no one answer that covers all scenarios. Accidents produce and are produced by many
Page 1 of 7 Ben Brodhead on proving causation and damages in spinal fusion cases. Friend on Facebook Follow on Twitter Forward to a Friend Proving Causation and Damages in Spinal Fusion Cases By: Ben C.
Board for Physician Workforce Spotlight on National Tort Reform & Reform in the Surrounding States August 2010 Tort reform continues to be a highly debated issue at both the state and national level. In
No-Fault Automobile Insurance By Margaret C. Jasper, Esq. Prior to the enactment of state no-fault insurance legislation, recovery for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident were subject
ATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE The healthcare industry has exploded over the last thirty years. Combined with an increasing elderly population, thanks to the Baby Boomer generation, the general
If you have been in an automobile accident that is not your fault and your vehicle is damaged, you do have certain rights. If total property damage from the wreck to all damages appears to be over $1,000.00,
WHAT ATTORNEYS AND CLAIMS ADJUSTERS REALLY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT COLLISION INVESTIGATION 2 nd Edition Robert E. Stearns, B.S., ACTAR #661 Kinetic Energy Press Rocklin, California Copyright 2007, All Rights
Changing Tort Reform In Kentucky Christel Siglock By changing its current No-Fault and Tort law options, Kentucky could; 1) Reduce the number of lawsuits filed, 2) Thus reducing insurance company payouts
MESH CLIENT NEWSLETTER Isssue 2 :: March, 2012 :: Dear Clients, In our last Mueller Law Newsletter, we included information on the difference between a class action and a mass tort. In an effort to keep
Common Myths About Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases 1 By B. Keith Williams There are several myths about accident cases and the attorneys that handle them. It is important to keep these myths in
WHAT HAPPENS AFTER A FLORIDA CAR ACCIDENT? This free EBook provides answers to car accident victims most frequently asked questions. This EBook does not provide actual legal advice, as every accident and
JUROR S MANUAL (Prepared by the State Bar of Michigan) Your Role as a Juror You ve heard the term jury of one s peers. In our country the job of determining the facts and reaching a just decision rests,
Cooper Hurley Injury Lawyers 2014 Granby Street, Suite 200 Norfolk, VA, 23517 (757) 455-0077 (866) 455-6657 (Toll Free) YOUR RIGHTS WHEN YOU ARE INJURED ON THE RAILROAD Cooper Hurley Injury Lawyers 2014
Chapter 4 Crimes (Review) On a separate sheet of paper, write down the answer to the following Q s; if you do not know the answer, write down the Q. 1. What is a crime? 2. There are elements of a crime.
FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY PLAINTIFF S NAME : Civil Trial Division : : Compulsory Arbitration Program : vs. : : Term, 20 : DEFENDANT S NAME
GWid: EXAMINATION CIVIL PROCEDURE II -- LAW 6213 Section 13 -- Siegel Spring 2014 INSTRUCTIONS 1. This is an open book examination. You may use any written materials that you have brought with you (including
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. CASE NO.: 16- DIVISION: CV- vs. Plaintiff, Defendant. ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING
H GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION HOUSE DRH-TG- (/01) D Short Title: Tort Reform Act of. (Public) Sponsors: Referred to: Representatives Blust and Daughtry (Primary Sponsors). 1 A BILL TO BE
PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS Frequently Asked Questions 1. Can I make a claim? If you have been injured because of the fault of someone else, you can claim financial compensation through the courts. The dependants
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC05-1150 IN RE: PETITION TO AMEND RULE 4-1.5(F)(4)(B) OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT / COMMENTS OF DAN CYTRYN, ESQUIRE OF LAW OFFICES CYTRYN & SANTANA, P.A.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION SUBROGATION AND THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS I. INTRODUCTION BY RICHARD M. JUREWICZ, ESQUIRE GALFAND BERGER, LLP 1835 Market Street, Suite 2710 Philadelphia, PA 19103 1-800-222-8792 (ext. 829)
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR CAR WRECK CASE PAGE 1 GREENVILLE FOUNTAIN INN 330 East Coffee Street 218 South Main Street Greenville, South Carolina 29601 Fountain Inn, South Carolina 29644 (864) 601-9048
2014 Construction of Statute Definition of Injury (Causation) Revises Section 50-6-116, Construction of Chapter, to indicate that for dates of injury on or after July 1, 2014, the chapter should no longer
Is What You Know About Injury Claims Accurate? Presented by: Attorney Mark L. Krueger www.kh-law.net IS WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT INJURY CLAIMS ACCURATE? Misconception No. 1 I have no claim if the responsible
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT ILLINOIS AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE AND ACCIDENTS What types of coverages are available? Generally, automobile insurance policies provide Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability
You are probably reading this guide because you were recently in an automobile accident. Now you are faced with some difficulties. The tasks of managing your care and your insurance claim can be confusing
Table of Contents 1. What should I do when the other driver s insurance company contacts me?... 1 2. Who should be paying my medical bills from a car accident injury?... 2 3. What should I do after the
SRJ 35: Study of Health Care Medical Malpractice: Montana's Approach to Limiting Liability by Sue O'Connell, Research Analyst Prepared for the Children, Families, Health, and Human Services Interim Committee
Home Slip and Fall - Pleadings Main Index - Complaint Walmart Frozen Food Dept Complaint - Walmart Substance on Floor in Frozen Food Dept. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD
SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION PARTIES The individual or corporation who initiates an action is known as the plaintiff. The individual or corporation against whom an action is brought is known as the
3 TRAPS THAT INSURANCE ADJUSTORS WILL SET FOR YOU.. BUT READ THIS FIRST (AND CAREFULLY): You may be like many people who are in car accidents who want to try and handle your insurance claim on your own.
Personal Injury Law: Minnesota Medical Malpractice Medical Malpractice Terms Statutes of Limitations Minnesota Medical Malpractice Laws Medical malpractice includes many forms of liability producing conduct
rightlawyers.com RIGHT Lawyers Right Lawyers has successfully represented numerous clients in the areas of car accidents, work injuries, and slip and falls. The goal of this guide is to provide you answers
A CONSUMER S GUIDE TO A SUCCESSFUL PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM TIPS AND ADVICE TO ENSURE THE BEST OUTCOME FOR YOUR PERSONAL INJURY CASE. MATERIAL PROVIDED BY: DICAUDO & YODER, LLC A CONSUMER S GUIDE TO A SUCCESSFUL
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
Auto 1. What s the difference between Limited Tort and Full Tort Auto Insurance Policies? Limited Tort and Full Tort refer to different types of coverage under a auto insurance policy and what compensation
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE FOR PARALEGALS III. PREPARATION OF PLEADINGS Many attorneys, paralegals and legal assistants refer to pleadings as all court papers in the case. Technically speaking, the pleadings
STATE OF WISCONSIN Frequently Asked Questions Auto Insurance OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE PI-233 (C 03/2015) The Automobile Insurance Policy (page 1) Wisconsin's Financial Responsibility Law
THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES By Craig R. White SKEDSVOLD & WHITE, LLC. 1050 Crown Pointe Parkway Suite 710 Atlanta, Georgia 30338 (770)
VETTING THE EXPERT---YOURS AND THEIRS Too often an attorney will retain an expert on the advice of another attorney or based on a limited amount of time spent searching for the expert. The most important
Page 1 of 9 Guide to Small Claims Court 1. Introduction 2. What is Small Claims Court? 3. Who Can Sue and What Can You Sue About? 4. Before You Sue 5. When Must a Lawyer Represent Me in Small Claims? 6.
GUIDE TO PERSONAL INJURY/ACCIDENT CLAIMS At Richard Grogan & Associates we have Solicitors with significant experience and expertise who will advise and guide you through all matters relating to bringing
This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp.~l' ''''d:.,j i.;'~\;
RULES OF LAW Injury Case Roadmap: The Legal Process for Personal Injury Cases BY EDDIE E. FARAH & CHARLIE E. FARAH, ATTORNEYS AT LAW ...insurance companies more and more are being run by bean counters,...
Commonly Used Terms in Auto Accident Cases 117 South Willow Avenue Tampa, Florida 33606 Toll Free: 877-444-2929 Phone: 813-223-2929 Fax: 813-251-6853 Definitions are specific as to Florida Law. Other state
www.goldbergsegalla.com NEW YORK PENNSYLVANIA CONNECTICUT NEW JERSEY UNITED KINGDOM Litigating the Products Liability Case: Discovery New York State Bar Association Buffalo, NY October 22, 2013 Presenter
Appendix II One Third Contingent Fee Agreement with Waiver of Sliding Scale, 2008 NAME OF CLIENT: DATE OF INJURY: JACOBS, GRUDBERG, BELT, DOW & KATZ P.C. ATTORNEY CONTINGENT FEE AGREEMENT WITH WAIVER OF
CHAPTER 7 NURSING LIABILITY INSURANCE We have all read many articles on and heard seminar speakers advocate why nurses should not buy professional liability insurance. However, in our opinion, there are
Buyer Beware Things To Know About Buying Car Insurance In Washington State By Christopher M. Davis, Attorney at Law Davis Law Group, P.S. 2101 Fourth Avenue Suite 630 Seattle, WA 98121 206-727-4000 Davis
New York Car Accident Lawyers What you need to know when you are hurt in a car accident An ebook by Stuart DiMartini, Esq. 1325 Sixth Avenue, 27 th Floor New York, NY 10019 212-5181532 dimartinilaw.com
New South Wales Motor Accidents Compensation Amendment (Claims and Dispute Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 No 41 2 4 Amendment of other
Arizona State Senate Issue Paper June 22, 2010 Note to Reader: The Senate Research Staff provides nonpartisan, objective legislative research, policy analysis and related assistance to the members of the
The Assessment and Equalization of Damages for Personal Injuries in the United States By Professor Francis E. McGovern, Duke University Law School Damages for personal injuries in the United States are
TEXAS AUTO ACCIDENTS Auto accidents can cause thousands or even millions of dollars in losses due to medical expenditures, an inability to work, a reduction in future earnings, or the untimely death of
Mandatory Arbitration The Alternative To Trial By Christopher M. Davis, Attorney at Law 206-727-4000 Phone: 206-727-4000 Fax: 206-727-4001 email@example.com Copyright 2007 by Christopher Michael
12 Common Auto Accident Myths: Protecting your rights and wallet after being injured in an auto accident. Introduction An auto accident can dramatically change your life. You could be injured and/or in
A GUIDE TO INDIANA WORKER S COMPENSATION 2004 EDITION MACEY SWANSON AND ALLMAN 445 North Pennsylvania Street Suite 401 Indianapolis, IN 46204-1800 Phone: (317) 637-2345 Fax: (317) 637-2369 A GUIDE TO INDIANA
WikiLeaks Document Release February 2, 2009 Congressional Research Service Report RS20519 ASBESTOS COMPENSATION ACT OF 2000 Henry Cohen, American Law Division Updated April 13, 2000 Abstract. This report
Information for Worker s Compensation Clients Overview of the Worker s Compensation Act Indiana Worker s Compensation cases are governed by a State law known as the Worker s Compensation Act. The legislature