June 24, 2009

Average Personal Injury Verdict in Florida: Settlements and Jury Awards in Florida

The average personal injury verdict in Florida is $1,819,751, according to Jury Verdict Research, a company that tracks jury verdicts. Personal injury plaintiff win at trial in Florida personal injury cases approximately 61 percent of cases that go to trial.

Florida’s threshold requiring a more serious injury in auto accident case is one reason why the average jury verdict in Florida much higher than the national average. These Florida jury statistic verdicts also underscore that large case inflate average jury verdicts and settlements. The median – as opposed to the average – money damages in Florida personal injury trials in Florida is $122,674.

If you have been injured in a serious car accident (our lawyers only handle serious car accident claims), call our auto accident lawyers at 800-553-8082 or click here for free no obligation consultation.

June 22, 2009

How Much for an Ankle Injury? Verdicts and Settlements

Metro Verdicts Monthly provides the following data to give the median (not average) settlement and verdicts for ankle fracture injuries:

District of Columbia: $66,000

Virginia: $21,700

Maryland: $88,000

My comment? People rarely have minor ankle injuries in car accidents in my experience. So I think a lot of slip and fall ankle injuries are included in here which lowers the value from pure auto accident ankle injury claims (or malpractice claims which are more rare for ankle injuries). I don't think we have ever had an ankle injury case settled for less than $150,000 and I can think of one that settled for over a $1,000,000 (although that case had other complicated injuries so it is hard to sort out where the value was in the case).

For more analysis of this data and more data on ankle injuries verdicts nationally, check out this Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog post.

Related Posts

Valuing Injury Cases in Maryland (value of accidents in Maryland)

Valuing Cases in Virginia (general info on Virginia injury case results)

Valuing Cases in Washington D.C. (general infomation on Washington D.C. personal injury case results)

June 17, 2009

Average Back Injury Settlement

The Missouri Lawyers Weekly ("MLW") verdicts and settlements database found that the median plaintiff's verdict award for motor vehicle cases that involved back injuries is $212,500. For all car, truck and motorcycle accident injury cases in MLW's database that earned a plaintiff's verdict, the median award is $300,000.

June 4, 2009

Jury Award Trends

Median jury awards in motor vehicle tort trials dropped to $17,000 in 2005 from $41,000 in 1992. I don't know about you but this underscores to me that auto accident verdicts are not driving car insurance rates.

The picture is different in medical malpractice and product liability lawsuits. Product liability trials had median awards at least five times higher in 2005 than in 1992. Medical malpractice trials median awards more than doubled to $682,000 in 2005 from $280,000 in 1992.

I realize this data is a bit dated - 2005 - but that is how we typically get personal injury statistics... a little dated.

You can find the entire study here.

May 28, 2009

Car Accident in Mississippi: Service of Process

One historic hassle for lawyers serving defendant in car accident cases is when the Defendant lives out-of-state. Mississippi provides a bad door that makes this process a lot easier for Mississippi car accident lawyers. Under Mississippi accident law, the Mississippi Secretary of State can accept service of process for accident defendants who live outside of Mississippi.

You can read about the nuances of exactly how to effectuate service in a Mississippi car accident case here.

If you are looking for a car accident lawyer to handle your auto accident injury case in Mississippi, call our lawyers at 800-553-8082 or click here for a free no obligation consultation of your accident claim.

May 27, 2009

Fiat Seeks Relief from Product Liability Claims

Fiat has asked a federal bankruptcy judge to shield the automaker from "unknowable, but potentially vast" tort claims against further partner Chrysler. Fiat lawyers argued that Fiat should not be responsible for injuries caused by cars it did not manufacturer.

File this under "I Could See This Coming." When you buy a company, you buy its assets and its debts. Consumer groups and plaintiff attorneys naturally disagree with this effort to buy Chrysler immunity from injuries caused by its negligence.


May 12, 2009

How to Avoid a Speeding Ticket?

AOL today puts up tips on how to avoid a speeding ticket. Is offering any advice other than "drive the speed limit" responsible?

The reality is simple: the faster a car or truck is moving, the less time the driver has to react avoid car accident. A speeding car requires more time and distance to stop, is harder to control, and caused more property damage and damage to the car's occupants. Speed is reported to factor in 30% of fatal vehicle accidents and 12% of all crashes.

May 11, 2009

Car Accident Lawsuit in Fayettesville

A Fayettesville woman filed a lawsuit in an auto accident case against a Springdale, Arkansas on her own behalf and on behalf of her one year old daughter. The lawsuit alleges that the unborn child had accident-related complications before and after her birth including a Grade 1 intraventricular hemorrhage and that the child had periods in which she stopped breathing.

As a parent, I can only imagine the fear of harm to your child when you are 35 weeks pregnant and involved in a serious car accident causing these complications. Thankfully, I have to think the child did not have any long term injury or the lawsuit - for a one year old - would be incredibly premature because injuries to a small child are rarely discernable in scope until the child is older.

If you are victim of a personal injury car accident in Fayettesville or anywhere in Arkansas, call 800-553-8082 or click here for a free consultation.


May 4, 2009

Cross Examining IME Doctors with Bias

John Bratt's Baltimore Accident Lawyer Blog has a good post on cross examining IME doctors.

May 1, 2009

Ford Explorer Car Transmission Verdict

A Georgia woman who filed a lawsuit alleging a car accident as the result of a a transmission defect in her Ford Explorer led to her paralysis was awarded $40 million in damages by a Lamar County jury late Wednesday. The jury's award includes $30 million in punitive damages, $9 million in compensatory damages to her and $1 million to her husband.

You can find the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article here and the Maryland Auto Accident Lawyer blog post on this tragic car accident case.

April 29, 2009

Texas Finds Insurance Coverage in Auto Accident

The Texas Supreme Court, in an 8-1 ruling, upheld a jury verdict that found Nationwide Insurance responsible for covering injuries sustained to a Texas family involved in a collision with one of its policyholders.

Nationwide's insured was chased by police before the accident where he collided with the Plaintiffs. Nationwide refused to pay the claim, arguing that their policyholder had forfeited his right to coverage when he began the chase. Plaintiffs' Texas accident lawyer argued that the logic of Nationwide's argument is if you try to run a red light, speed or take any other intentional act not intended to cause an accident in Texas, that would also be an intentional act for which there would be no insurance coverage. The Texas Supreme Court agreed ruling that "Texas mandates liability insurance for drivers but if ordinary Texans are unprotected from those who speed or run red lights, but intend no harm to others by doing so, then Texas is replete with non-coverage notwithstanding its mandatory-coverage requirement."

A spokesperson for Nationwide said the insurance company is "glad the high court has resolved the issue of whether a high-speed chase falls within the 'intentional acts' exclusion in Texas. Nationwide intends to comply with the courts ruling on this complex issue." So Nationwide just wanted the issue resolved - that was their goal in all of this? Please.

If you have been injured in a car accident anywhere in Texas, including Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Brownsville, El Paso, Arlington, Corpus Christi, Plano, Amarillo, and Garland, you may need a Texas accident lawyer. Call 800-553-8082 to speak with a lawyer today or click here for a free Texas auto accident lawyer consultation.

April 3, 2009

Average Car Accident Verdict in Arizona

Jury Verdict Research found that that the median money damage award in vehicle accident cases in Arizona is $16,929. Plaintiffs win money damages in 53 percent of cases that go to trial.

JVR also breaks down the type of accident: rear-end accidents accounted for 27 percent of the total number of plaintiff verdicts; intersection accidents accounted for 13 percent; turning collisions accounted for 12 percent; truck accidents accounted for 11 percent; chain reaction collisions accounted for 9 percent. All other liabilities made up 8 percent or less of the total.

I'm not sure why truck accidents were given their own category in the type of accidents. But this Arizona verdict data is interesting and I think reflects the relative proportions of the different types of vehicle accidents nationally.

March 25, 2009

California Personal Injury Settlements

Jury Verdict Research recent look a verdicts in personal injury cases in California shows the compensatory median award for personal injury trials in California is $150,000. This is a lot higher than the national average of less than $40,000. But plaintiffs receive money damages in only 45 percent of cases that go to trial, which is 5% less than the national average.

What does this data mean for personal injury plaintiffs in California? Not much but it is interesting data.

If you need a personal injury lawyer in California, call 800-553-8082 or click here for a free initial consultation.

March 19, 2009

San Mateo Auto Accident Verdict

The Maryland Auto Accident Lawyer Blog reports that the recent $45 million verdict reported in San Mateo, California is misleading because of the coverage issues that remain in the case.

December 12, 2008

$8 Verdict in Broward County Car Accident

A Broward County jury awarded more than $8 million to the wife and three daughters of a North Miami Beach police officer in a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from a 2004 car accident. Jurors found that the family of the other driver and the Florida Department of Transportation were 70 percent negligent in the crash. The decedent Officer Orestes Lorenzo was found to be 30 percent responsible for the accident that caused his death. Accordingly, the jury reduced their award under Florida comparative negligence law from $11.5 million.

The Broward County jury hearing the case took their job seriously: the verdict was rendered at midnight on Saturday.

November 10, 2008

Reducing the Number of Car Accidents

AOL provides this morning blinding insight into how to avoid car accidents with the news breaking "drive defensively" and the completely practical suggestion that we all take a refresher course on driver safety.

Car accidents are caused by human error in the overwhelming majority of auto accident cases - the failure to pay time and attention to what we should be doing on the roadway. We don't need to become more educated on the rules of the road or take another driving lesson. We need to (1) pay attention and (2) not combine alcohol and driving. That is the magic elixir. Period. What is hysterical is how many car accident lawyer blogs will link to this article and point to the insight it provides.

November 4, 2008

Lawsuit Against Bar for Drunk Driver

Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar was named in a lawsuit following a fatal alcohol-related car crash. In the lawsuit, plaintiff claims the bar overserved a man on the night of the accident and was negligent in the death of her daughter.

This is an awful case. The man's pickup truck collided with a car occupied by three teenagers, killing two people of them and seriously injuring the third. The drunk driver was also killed in the car accident.

As tragic as this case is, I do have some concern with dram shop laws that hold bars accountable in these case just because I think it is so difficult to track who has been served what at a bar.

October 29, 2008

Missouri Univesity Student Awarded $450,000 in Bicycle Accident

A student at Missouri University was awarded $450,000, a jury in Missouri found this week. The student was struck on a bike while crossing an intersection and then hit a second time and dragged by a Columbia Water and Light truck. Jurors determined that the driver of the first car and the City of Columbia were to blame for 25 percent of the accident.

The verdict was for $1.8 million but under Missouri's comparative negligence law, the defendants are responsible for their portion of 25% of the fault.

October 28, 2008

AIG Agrees to Settlement in Brain Injury Case

AIG will pay $18 million to settle a lawsuit filed by a man who suffered a serious brain injury after he was struck by a truck in the parking lot of an apartment complex. The settlement nullifies a $75 million judgment reached in a North Carolina superior court after an AIG subsidiary declined to defend the case. Why they declined to defend the case is anyone's guess but it certainly was a screw-up that probably increased the value of this case.

October 15, 2008

Phantom Vehicle Uninsured Motorist Claims in Maryland

Mr. Miller:

Hi, I am a Maryland attorney and would like to get little mentoring on any differences between an unidentified motorist claim and an uninsured motorist claim. Please call or send me an email and I promise I'll be brief. Thanks so much for any help!

Dear Maryland Attorney:

There is uninsured motorist coverage under victim's, or the victim's resident relative, own car insurance policy. You will find in your client's uninsured motorist endorsement that there is coverage for a hit-and-run vehicle (you don't need an actual hit, just an unidentifed or phantom vehicle) whose operator or owner cannot be identified and which hits or causes an accident resulting in bodily injury or propety damage. See Section 20-601(c) of the Maryland Insurance Article and Section 19-509.

An accident lawyer can make a phantom vehicle case in Maryland though the testimony of the Plaintiff or, better yet, independent witnesses.

Good luck, I hope this helps. - Ron Miller

October 1, 2008

Fatal Car Accident on the Decline

The Florida Injury Attorney Blog has good post providing some good news on national car accident statistics from 2007.

I'm pleased to see the number of fatal car accidents falling relatively precipitously (given how constant the data has typically been). I'm not concluding this is the only cause of the drop in car accident fatalities but it is worth noting that a wonderful byproduct of extremely high gas prices is less auto accident deaths. (My suggestion: raise the gasoline tax.)

September 30, 2008

Text Messaging While Driving

Christopher T. Hurley of the Illinois Car and Truck Accident Lawyer Blog has a post about calls in Chicago for a ban on text messaging.

I believe 18 states have a texting ban while driving at least to some degree. Who would vote against such a ban? Is there any doubt that eventually text messaging while driving will be banned in every jurisdiction? So why don't we just cut to the chase and ban it now and maybe save a few lives in the process?

September 24, 2008

South Dakota Supreme Court Rear End Accident Opinion

Last week in Baddou v. Hall, the South Dakota Supreme Court either enunciated new law or affirmed existing law (depending upon your perspective) on whether South Dakota has a presumption of negligence in Rapid City rear-end car accident case. The court’s answer: it does not.

This is bad law, in my opinion, because it makes South Dakota car accident lawyer prove a negative. Rear-end car accidents rarely happen in the absence of negligence and the defendant is the one in the best position to know the nuance of the negligence. It is basically a technicality generating law.

I disagree with the Plaintiff that a rear end accident should be negligence per se. Instead, the better law, applied in many states such as Florida, Maryland, and Colorado, is that there is a rebuttable presumption of negligence in rear end accident cases.

The South Dakota court also affirmed in dicta the notion that the “mere fact an accident happened creates no inference that it was caused by someone’s negligence” in South Dakota. This instruction has fallen out of favor in many jurisdictions but, apparently, not in Bismarck.

Another aspect of South Dakota law that I don’t like is that they are more liberal in allowing police reports in evidence than most other states. Jurors are confused when they do not see the police report but they are even more confused when they do and tend to delegate their decision making power to the police officer instead of using their own judgment. I actually think this rule generally helps plaintiffs’ car accident lawyers. But not always and I don’t think the admission of the police report is fair.

September 19, 2008

Car Accident Claims Without a Lawyer: Handling Auto Accident Cases on Your Own

If you have talked to a personal injury lawyer who handles a lot of car accident cases in the last six months, you will hear complaints that car accident cases are drying up. Yet, unfortunately, there is no indication we have less automobile accidents in this country. So why?

I think the main reason is that car insurance companies are getting better at reaching out to clients before they find a lawyer. Insurance companies are absolutely entitled to do this. Moreover, I think this works mostly with smaller auto accident cases. The reality – and this is something a lot of car accident lawyers don’t want prospective clients to know – is that you can often handle small auto accident cases without a lawyer.

Our car accident lawyers handling your case will increase the value of your case. In fact, the mere involvement of our law firm, given our reputation, is going to increase the value of your case. But how much? If you have a big case, it will increase the value a great deal. Our car accident lawyers have been referred cases by other lawyers that already have an offer and we have gotten more than 35 times the offer given to the original lawyer. But our accident lawyers’ ability to add value to your case is directly proportional to the size of the case. If you have a case with an ER visit and a few physical therapy sessions, our car accident lawyers will increase the value of your case. And it certainly will make your life easier because you have someone to process everything for you. But is it enough to make it worth hiring us? The answer to that varies from case to case. Our car accident lawyers used to take these kinds of cases because we thought it was a bad idea to deny anyone the right to a lawyer if they had a valid claim. Now, I’m telling at least a third of the people that call us with legitimate cases that they certainly can hire a lawyer, but they also have the option to proceed without a lawyer, and we tell them what they should do to continue bringing their car accident claim without a lawyer.

Don’t get me wrong: there are real risks in proceeding on your own without a car accident lawyer. Among other risks, you can miss deadlines to file a claim and you don’t have the experience that a car accident lawyer does to know the value of your auto accident claim. But the reality is some people are willing to assume those risks. If you are one of those people, you can click on the article titled “Handling My Own Auto Accident Claim.”

If you are going to proceed without a lawyer for your car accident, call a lawyer just to discuss your case with them.

Related Posts:

Handling Your Own Auto Accident Claim (a “how to” for those proceeding on their own)

Why Hiring a Lawyer is the Best Way to Maximize Your Recovery in Most Auto Accident Cases (explanation of the pitfalls of proceeding without a lawyer).

What is the Value of My Car Accident Case? (explanation of how value is determined in auto accident cases)

Sample Demand Letter (sample letter to the insurance company to settle an accident claim)

September 15, 2008

Value of Facial Scarring Injuries

Metro Verdicts provides this month information on facial scarring settlements and verdict in Maryland and Virginia. The median facial scarring verdicts in Maryland and Virginia are $20,000 and $32,500, respectively.

These numbers seem bizarrely low. Of course, I’m not really sure about the inclusion criteria for this study. How do they define facial injuries? Are they permanent? Must they be visible? Because for what I consider facial scarring, these number seem shockingly low.

Related Posts:

What is the Value of My Personal Injury Case? (analysis of how value is determined in personal injury cases)

Value of Personal Injury Cases in Your State (state-by-state comparision)

September 3, 2008

Washington Appeals Court Ruling in Legal Malpractice Car Accident Case

The Court of Appeals of Washington in Shoemake v. Ferrer, 182 P.3rd 992 (2008) considered an interested argument by a defendant in a legal malpractice case. The Defendant lawyers blew a statute of limitations by two days in a serious head on car accident collusion case with a drug driver. This was a guy that really needed a car accident lawyer in Washington that was competent to handle his case.

The problem was that he apparently did not find a competent car accident attorney. Instead, he found a lawyer that ignored State’s Farm’s $ 100,000 offer to pay on Plaintiff’s uninsured motorist claim because he was “was unsure of the legal ramifications of accepting that payment.” The lesson, as always: if you are not qualified to handle a serious car accident case, don’t to it. So many lawyers who don’t handle car accident claims regularly think that they can. It sounds so easy, they think. It is not.

But that is not what is interesting about the case. What is interesting is the Defendant contended successfully to the trial judge that the negligent car accident lawyers were entitled to have the damages awarded reduced by the amount stated in the lawyer’s contingency fee agreement with the client.

That’s pretty outrageous when you think about it. What these lawyers are arguing is that the client, who got creamed by a drunk driver, should have to pay the 40% contingency fee twice, once to him and once to the lawyer he had to sure for legal malpractice. This would knock the victim’s recovery back to 36%. Insane.

The Washington Court of Appeals in Shoemake agreed, citing supporting case law in California, Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota that the client should not be required to pay attorneys’ fees twice for the same recovery.

August 27, 2008

James Publishing: Insurance Settlements

My two volume treatise Insurance Settlements is now available from James Publishing. The book discusses how to position a lawyer's car accident, truck accident, medical malpractice or product liability case to the best possible settlement at every step along the way (until the state's high court affirms the judgment).

Click on the James Publishing link. If you have any comments on the book, please email me at ronmiller@millerandzois.com under the subject "Insurance Settlements Comments."

August 25, 2008

Mississippi Supreme Court's Dissenting Opinion That We Almost Never Read

The Mississippi Supreme Court - an elected body that has a recent history of siding with defendants in personal injury cases - attempted to bar a dissenting opinion from Justice Oliver Diaz, Jr. in a wrongful death case. Diaz dissented with the majority's decision to remand Mississippi Veterans Affairs Board v. Kraft.

Justice Diaz argued in the dissent of a wrongful death case that the statute of limitations for wrongful death lawsuits begins at the time of the injury, not on the date of death. "The obvious result is that a wrongful death action may expire before the decedent does," Justice Diaz wrote.

Justice Diaz is no stranger to the crazy world of Mississippi politics. In 2005, a jury cleared Justice Diaz of all bribery charges. His ex-wife, however, pled guilty to tax evasion and was sentenced to two years' probation. But the logic of his argument - that wrongful death claims start at the time of death - is so manifestly obvious that defense lawyers in other jurisdictions would not even make the argument.

The Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association needs to do a better job of getting out the message of how personal injury victims are being treated in Mississippi. Because Mississippi in the matter of a decade has gone from a jurisdiction with an open mind on personal injury claims to a state that says no to any issue that is a close call and some that should not even be close calls.


August 20, 2008

First Bad Faith Car Accident Insurance Claims in Maryland

Bob Zarbin and Jim MacAlister write a telling article in this month’s journal of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association about Maryland’s new bad faith law. The authors note that the avalanche of bad faith claims the insurance companies said were coming down the pike with Maryland’s new bad faith law was actually only 12 in the first quarter of the 2008 and only 12 all last year.

Similarly, on the medical malpractice front, Maryland malpractice insurers claimed the sky was falling one minute and the next they are declaring $74 million profit to their doctor shareholders and lowering malpractice insurance rates. The legislative process requires that the viewpoints of all stakeholders. But can we at least make sure we put the proper discounted value on “the sky is falling” on the next go around? I’m hoping the next go around includes a revised bad faith law with more teeth than mere costs and expenses.

In the same issue, Kevin Goldberg, who is with Goldberg, Finnegan & Mester in Silver Spring, Maryland, writes a great article laying out a great checklist of avenues to explore when you have a catastrophic accident and what appears to be limited coverage.

The message, as always: if you are a plaintiffs’ lawyer in Maryland handling personal injury claims, you should be member of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association.

August 18, 2008

Connecticut Supreme Court Defines "Bodily Injury"

The Connecticut Supreme Court reached an interesting decision this week on the question of recovery for emotional damages in car accident cases. You can find the Connecticut Supreme Court opinion and analysis of the opinion here.

Thanks. - Ron Miller

http://www.marylandinjurylawyerblog.com/2008/08/connecticut_supreme_courts_rul.html

August 11, 2008

Rotator Cuff Injury Lawyers

Jury Verdict Research(r) study reports that rotator cuff injuries reached a 7-year high in 2006 with a compensatory award median of $72,667. This is almost 50% higher than previous reported settlements and verdicts in rotator cuff injury cases.

Our lawyers have never understood while the national data in these cases was so low. Washington D.C. rotator cuff injuries have averaged well over $100,000 for rotator cuff settlements and verdicts so we have never understood why the national average was as low as it has been. In any event, for whatever reason, rotator cuff verdicts are on the rise.

Our lawyers handle rotator cuff injury cases throughout the United States. Our lawyers have handled scores of rotator cuff injuries in car and truck accidents, typically in side collision or "T-bone" accidents. Our lawyers believe that insurance companies do not give fair value in most rotator cuff injury cases and our lawyers will fight to get you the financial compensation you deserve. Call a rotator cuff lawyer to protect you at 800-553-8082 or click here for a free consultation and case evaulation.

Related Posts

What Is the Value of Your Personal Injury Claim? (how the value of rotator cuff and other person injury settlements are calculated)

Sample Demand Letter (sample letter demanding settlement in a personal injury case)

Handling Your Claim Without a Lawyer (tips and pratfalls)

August 11, 2008

New York Jury Awards

Jury Verdict Research's recent study finds that the compensatory median award for personal injury trials in New York is $287,628, dwarfing nationwide median is $34,550. The report is trials from 2001-2007.

New York has favorable juries, particuarly in its urban areas. But the reality is that this number is distorted by the lack of smaller and midsized car accident lawsuits. Under New York's no-fault law, an insurance company is required to pay drivers, passengers and pedestrians up to $50,000.00 for the legitimate economic and medical losses but does not provide for pain and suffering. Only permanent injuries cases can recover more than $50,000. This leads to less lawsuits in smaller cases - of which there are many - which increases the overall award in New York.

July 30, 2008

Jury Verdict in Anne Arundel County Pedestrian Accident Case

The Baltimore Injury Lawyer Blog has a great blog post on a trial John Bratt had with State Farm yesterday in Anne Arundel County in an uninsured motorist case. When the offer is zero, $60,000 is not a bad recovery.

Thankfully, these days we do not have the opportunity to try a lot of personal injury jury trials where the offer is zero. But it sure is a stress free way to try a case because the client has absolutely nothing to lose.

July 28, 2008

Rhode Island Drunk Driving Accident Ruling

In Willis v. Omar, the Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled that there is no "social host" liability for homeowners who served alcohol to a couple who were later injured in a drunk-driving accident, the Rhode Island Supreme Court has ruled. The Rhode Island high court ruled that the court refuses to "adopt the principle that a social host owes a duty to a third party for injuries suffered by an intoxicated guest who was imbibing at his or her home...."

Rhode Island personal injury lawyers may disagree but I actually believe this is the correct ruling based on Rhode Island law. I think it is morally reprehensible to allow - or at least try to stop - a drunk driver when you served or make the alcohol available. But I do think it may be difficult to put the monitoring burden on a bar or the server of alcohol at a party even in this case where the driver had a BAC of .196. But it should depend on the facts. If you certainly know that someone is drunk and just say "Hey, have a great night" it seems like there is something awful about that. Should that be a tort if a third party is injured? I don't know.

The injured Plaintiff did receive a $300,000 settlement in the personal injury case against the drunk driver himself but it hardly compensated her for her catastrophic injuries which included an amputated leg.

July 14, 2008

United Auto in Florida: The Soap Opera Continues

United Automobile Insurance lawyer Charles Grimsley has agreed to a public reprimand for saying Miami-Dade judges "are being paid off" by plaintiffs’ car accident lawyers.
Grimsley was clearly agitated by the success of plaintiffs’ accident lawyers in small claims personal injury protection cases in Florida. In frustration he said, "I think the judges are being paid off, but I can't prove that."

I think but I cannot prove. I think United Automobile Insurance is on the wrong side of justice in Florida because they are essentially taking premiums but fighting payout of too many valid claims under a scorched earth policy with its own insured. But I can’t see anything wrong with “I think but I cannot prove.” If we can only talk about what we can prove as opposed to what we suspect, the First Amendment is worth nothing. And lawyers are entitled to their First Amendment rights just like anyone else.

I think if Grimsley had fought this he would have prevailed but I suspect United Auto wanted a cessation of tensions in Florida and asked Grimsley to rollover.

July 11, 2008

Lawyer Referring Clients to Doctors in Car Accident Cases

One dilemma we often face is dealing with a client in car accident cases is that they would like us to refer them to a health care provider. The best path is always to have client direct their own medical care. But in the real world, you cannot always do this. If you do refer a client to a doctor, here are few ideas to limit the damage of the classic cross-examination question: “You lawyer referred you to this doctor, didn’t he?”

First, file a motion in limine requesting that evidence of the attorney's recommendation be excluded as protected by the attorney-client privilege. In a Florida personal injury car accident case, Burt v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 603 So.2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992), a Florida Court of Appeal was asked to decided if the following questions were permissible from the defendant’s accident lawyer: (1) when did they obtain an accident lawyer, and (2) did their lawyer refer them to a particular doctor? The Florida court ruled that the former question did not violate the attorney-client privilege but the second question, which sought to uncover confidential conversations between the accident lawyer and the client, was a violation of the lawyer-client privilege. Cite this case, argue that a rule requiring disclosure of such information is a significant incursion into the province of the attorney-client privilege, and take your best shot.

If your motion is denied, get it out up front in the opening the reasons why the client took a lawyer referral What “excuse” do you give? Ask the client. Generally speaking, injured clients have a good reason why they wanted to defer to their accident lawyer. They may not like or even have a primary care doctor, the client’s doctor’s office may be far away, or they may struggle to get an immediate appointment. In closing argument, tell them that the defense lawyer is trying to distract you from the real issues: the doctor is qualified to treat the patient and the patient is injured.

Will this work? Obviously, if the motion in limine succeeds, the issue is taken out of play. Otherwise, the chances that these tactics will limit the damage of an attorney referral in the eyes of the jury will be directly proportional to the seriousness of the plaintiff’s injuries and, more importantly, whether the injury is objective or subjective.

A lot of injury lawyers take the position of "who cares about whether a lawyer referred the client because it should not make any difference." They are right, it should not make a difference. But it does to a jury and, accordingly, it must matter to plaintffs' car accident lawyers.

June 27, 2008

Dallas Uninsured Motorist Law

The Dallas City Counsel voted 10-5 to tow the cars of drivers who cannot produce proof of car insurance after a traffic stop. The new car insurance law will take effect on January 1, 2009.

I’m pleased to see that Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle said police would use prudence in enforcing this law. For example, police would not tow a vehicle if towing would result in a family with children being stranded at night on the side of a road.

I honestly do not know how I feel about this law but I’m having a hard time coming up with legitimate arguments against it. District 6 council member Steve Salazar, who is against the bill, does not provide me any help. He is quoted as saying, “"I want my officers catching burglars, people committing assaults, people committing rapes, people committing murders. Our priority is fighting crime."

Mr. Salazar is creating a false choice. We don’t have to choose between stopping murders and rapes and fighting back against people that refuse to get auto insurance. We can and do afford both.

June 17, 2008

Brittany Spears Avoids Criminal Charges in Pedestrian Car Accident

Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Joseph Shidler told the media that he did not have evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Brittany Spears was aware that the paparazzo foot she ran over had been struck by the car. In fact, Mr. Shidler said that the “only way the victim's foot could have been where the video indicates it to be was by the victim placing it in that location."

Is he suggesting that the victim intentionally caused his own injury? In a normal situation, I would scream that this is classic blame the victim nonsense. In this case, in the bizzaro world that is Hollywood? Who knows?

June 17, 2008

New California Cell Phone Laws: No Teeth But Step in the Right Direction

On July 1st, California will ban drivers using a handheld wireless telephone while driving a motor vehicle. Of course, you can still text message while driving.

No, I cannot explain it. You could drive a truck through the flawed logic of the new California cell phone laws. There is no teeth to the new law either. Violators of the new law are subejct to a fine of $20 for the first offense and not more than $50 for each subsequent offense. No points on your license either. But I still think California is making a step in the right direction.

June 16, 2008

Settlement Reached Fatal Bus Accident in Washington D.C.

The husband of a Washington, D.C. pedestrian who was killed by a bus last year, settled his claim for $2.3 with Washington Metro. The Plaintiff's wife had the “walk” signal while crossing the street. A wrongful death lawsuit filed against the Washington Metro was set for trial in October.

The District of Columbia could do what Maryland, Virginia and many other jurisdictions do and cap damages when claims are brought against it or related entities. But the District chooses to do the right thing by requiring itself to be fully accountable for its own negligence.

June 16, 2008

Seat Belts and Fatal Car Accidents

The Georgia Injury Lawyer Blog has a post on how some people are still not wearing seat belts, citing fatality statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that found that more than two-thirds of young people killed in nighttime car crashes were not wearing a seat belt.

The good news is that seat belt use is still rising; total belt use rose 1% to 82% in 2007. Still, three states - Arkansas, Massachusetts and New Hampshire - have less than 70% of vehicle occupants wearing seat belts. As we mentioned in a post last week, New Hampshire still does not require motorcycle occupants to wear a helmet. New Hampshire needs to heed its motto: "Life safe or die." (Or something like that.)

June 9, 2008

Chantix: Auto Accident Lawyers Prepare for New Defense

Auto accidents lawyers should get ready for a new defense in accident claims: driving on Chantix. A safety group’s report last month found a possible association between more than two dozen auto accident and the quit smoking drug Chantix, leaving open the possiblity that auto accidents might result from using Chantix from seizures or visual disturbances.

Plaintiffs' auto accident lawyers will argue that a warning was added to the prescribing literature for Chantix that users should be careful when until they get a feel for how Chantix affects them. Still, driving while on Chantix is not a bad defense if the defendant can prove the relationship between the Chantix and the accident.

While such an outcome would be unfortunate for the plaintiff's auto accident lawyer and his client in that particular case, it would be of great help to Chantix lawyers around the country who are bringing lawsuit against Chantix for the drug's side effects.

June 9, 2008

New Hampshire Motorcycle Helmet Laws

The Eagle Tribune from the "Live Free or Die" state of New Hampshire has an interesting article on motorcycle helmets and New Hampshire's refusal to implement mandatory helmet laws.

In a few days, Motorcycle Week kicks off 300,000 visitors from June 14 to 22. If the average person spends $1,000, that is a $300 million dollar infusion in the economy. I would suspect Motorcycle Week would go elsewhere if New Hampshire changed their law, which would have a lot of pro-business lobbyist up in arms. But 27 people died in 2003 (the most recent data I have seen) in New Hampshire in motorcycle accidents. How many of those people were not wearing helmets?

The most serious accident cases our accident lawyers see disproportionately involve motorcycle accidents. At some point, New Hampshire needs to give up Motorcycle Week in exchange for Living Motorcyclist Future, $300 million or no.

May 5, 2008

Minnesota Personal Injury Verdicts

A Jury Verdict Research study found that the median award in Minnesota in personal injury cases is an even $30,000. Minnesota personal injury plaintiffs receive an award in 67 percent of cases that go to trial.

The median compensation in Minnesota is somewhat below the national median of $38,179 and I suspect Minneapolis, St. Paul and Rochester verdicts inflate that average a bit. But because Minnesota has no fault coverage (or PIP) in car accident cases up to $40,000 ($20,000 for medical bills and $20,000 for economic loss) that is subject to the collateral source rule, Minnesota personal injury lawyers tend to few small cases in Minnesota. In other words, Minnesota law provides that personal injury awards are offset by collateral source payments (if the source of reimbursement does not have a subrogation right). So the gap between the Minnesota median verdict and the national median verdict is probably wider than the numbers reflect. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found Minnesota juries to be the "15th best" which means the 15th worst for personal injury victims.

Interestingly, Minnesota personal injury recovery probability is 67% compared to the national average of 53%. I would think that the fewer amount of smaller claims would lead to a lower recovery probability because Minnesota personal injury lawyers bring less smaller cases which typically do not involve a liability dispute which you would think would actually lower the recovery probability. Accordingly, it is fair to infer from the data that Minnesota juries are inclined to believe Minnesota plaintiff's claims as to how/why the accident/medical malpractice/injury occurred.

Although Minnesota juries are rather conservative, the big complaint that defendants' lawyers and drug and device companies have about Minnesota is that its laws are favorable to personal injury victims. Last year, there was an ABA Journal article, Lawsuits Travel Up North: Land of Ten Thousand Lakes Is Flooded With Thousands of Out-of-State Filings, that discussed the benefits of filing products liability claims in Minnesota, including Minnesota reasonable six-year statute of limitations in products liability cases. While lawyers rarely have seriously injured clients in a car accident that come to them years after the cause of action arose, this is a far more common occurrance in products liability cases because it sometimes takes a while for people to understand the connection between the negligence and their injuries, even if that information is available under the "know or have reason to know standard."


April 18, 2008

$5.3 Million First Party Bad Faith Verdict in Missoula, Montana

A U.S. District court jury in Missoula, Montana awarded a Bigfork doctoral student $5.3 million, finding Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company acted in bad faith. This verdict, which included $3.5 million in punitive damages, is the largest bad-faith insurance verdict in Montana history.

Plaintiff, a 32 year-old salmon ecologist, suffered brain injuries in a head-on collision. Her insurance policy included $1.5 million in uninsured motorist benefits.

Why did the jury find bad faith in Fireman’s Fund’s refusal to pay? Well, in the four years after Fireman's Insurance received notice of plaintiff’s, it did virtually no investigation at all. Fireman’s Fun collected one lousy page of her medical records, never sought a statement from the Plaintiff, or requested an IME or did anything to support their denial.

I’m as cynical about insurance companies as the next personal injury lawyer. But I have to believe that this case fell below the radar of Fireman’s Fund and this was the act of a few isolated claims adjusters because this case is just the classic definition of bad faith. This case reads like John Grisham’s book Rainmaker. Insurance companies just do not act this way in jurisdictions that have first party bad faith because they know that they are inviting this kind of claim and publicity.

April 4, 2008

Jay Spechler Resigns/Is Fired

Broward County, Florida Judge Jay Spechler abruptly resigned Monday after the chief judge barred him from the courthouse. Chief Judge Victor Tobin had reassigned Judge Spechler last week to traffic and parking matters at satellite courthouses until his resignation Monday.

Judge Spechler was in a war with United Auto who sought to disqualify him from cases involving the Florida-based carrier because the judge had a “pre-disposition, prejudice and bias” against its auto accident lawyers who were defending no fault (PIP) cases in Florida. Judge Spechler estimated that two thirds of his cases are PIP disputes with this insurance company. State Auto is the market share leader in car insurance in Florida. When you put two and two together, you get a lot of acrimony.

Apparently, Judge Spechler made more enemies that just State Auto. Courthouse sources said County Court Judge Jay Spechler’s reassignment came after he got into a verbal altercation with fellow Florida County Court, making comments about the judge’s sexual orientation. The impression I get is that new Chief Judge Tobin was no fan of Judge Spechler, who was closely aligned with former Chief Judge Dale Ross, who resigned last May.

Judge Spechler is apparently going to a mediation firm. Let me make a guess: he won't be handling a lot of State Auto mediations.

March 25, 2008

Independent Medical Exams in Oklahoma Personal Injury Cases

A plaintiff who is required to submit to an "independent medical examination" may videotape the exam according to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Click here for more on this ruling.

March 24, 2008

Allstate v. Texas Personal Injury Lawyers and Chiropractors

Jeremy Roebuck of The Monitor in South Texas writes an interesting article about, unlike Friday's blog post, Allstate going on the offensive against abuses in the personal injury system.

In this case, Allstate has brought a fraud lawsuit against a group of Rio Grande Valley chiropractic clinics and their lawyers, claiming that they improperly recruited personal injury victims, suggested patients undergo unnecessary treatments and then persuaded their patients to file personal injury lawsuits against Allstate.

Allstate alleges the clinics, Chiropractic Strategies, has telemarketers that encourage people to visit their clinics for a free evaluation. Once there, Allstate claims they were are diagnosed with injuries they did not have and overtreated for the injuries they did have. The article does not say but I’m assuming they are calling people who have been in auto accidents based on looking at police reports or some other means to find injury victims.

In what certainly is a smart tactic, Allstate also sued the South Texas personal injury lawyers that received the referrals from the chiropractic group, including one easy target that has an extensive history of disciplinary reprimands from the State Bar of Texas and has been convicted of theft and conspiracy to commit barratry - a third-degree felony charge aimed at lawyers who improperly solicit clients.

It is worth nothing nether Texas or local authorities in South Texas have brought fraud charges against this chiropractic group or these lawyers which calls into some question the strength of these claims. But, for once, I’m rooting for Allstate to put these guys out of business if these charges are true. I hope Allstate enjoys its brief time on the other side of the v.

March 21, 2008

Allstate Ordered to Decrease Automobile Insurance Premiums in California

California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner has ordered Allstate to reduce its auto insurance premiums in California by 15.9 percent. Commissioner Poizner's order follows a lengthy dispute between the Allstate and the California Insurance Commissioner.

For more on Allstate's problems elsewhere, click here and here.

March 18, 2008

Are West Virginia Tort and Injury Lawyers the Problem?

The West Virginia Record has an editorial about how the three of the top verdicts in the country came from West Virginia and derided plaintiffs’ lawyers as “tort barons” destroying industry in West Virginia and through the country.

Okay, the problem is West Virginia personal injury lawyers (tort lawyers). Just for fun, let’s look at the fact and see about all of these tort claims. The big verdict was a $404 million award in Roane County v. Columbia Natural Resources. In that case, 10,000 other royalty owners who questioned the price they were being paid for natural gas produced from their property. This is not a tort claim. This is a company stealing from people. Exactly how should such a claim be handled? Should the plaintiffs have allowed this to go on without question for the “good of industry?” How many folks on the Editorial Board of the West Virginia Record would have refused payment if they were in the class? It is just plain silly.

The second case cited, a $251 million verdict against Du Pont in Clarksburg was not a personal injury case but a lawsuit over Du Pont’s handling of the environmental cleanup created by a West Virginia zinc-smelting facility. This is was not a single insured person. This was a lot of people who had been hurt by a very large company in a case where the jury found they did not give due consideration to the environment or the surrounding property owners. Approximately 7000 people suffered harm to their property and we subjected to significant health risks. What would the Editorial Board of the West Virginia Record do if they sat on the jury in this case?
The final verdict in the top 10 was a $219 million verdict against Massey Energy. The Plaintiff was another big company who was suing for breach of contract. Perhaps if one big company breaches a contract against another big company, they should not be able to sue for breach of contract. Wonderful logic.

This West Virginia Record’s editorial is pathetic. I could argue their position better than they did. There is an intellectual argument that can be made calling some aspect of our tort system in question. I don’t agree this argument – I think it is dead wrong - but it can be made based on facts and it held by reasonable people. This argument is just plain silly and is an embarrassment to the West Virginia Record and the people it has misled.

March 13, 2008

Delaware Law on Admissibility of Photographs in Car Accident Cases

Most jurisdictions leave the the judge's discretion whether to admit photographs from a car accident for the purpose of demonstrating the extend of the injuries of the occupants of the car. In Davis v. Maute, 770 A.2d. 36 (Del. 2001), the Supreme Court of Delaware took a minority view, holding that a party in a car accident may not directly argue that the seriousness of the injuries from an auto accident correlates to the extent of the damage to the cars, unless there is testimony from an expert witness that makes a correlation.

Accordingly, lawyers in Delaware may not argue by implication what the lawyer could not argue indirectly and attempt to suggest that the lack of property damage reflects the minor injuries.

This is great for Delaware plaintiffs' lawyers in car accident cases who have minor property damage and claim injuries. Still, our lawyers prefer the majority rule because if you have a serious injury/serious impact case, you want to get the pictures to the jury to show the severity of the injuries and the Davis v. Maute holding can backfire on plaintiffs.

March 5, 2008

Mississippi Supreme Court Dismisses Case Against Truck Stop

A truck driver whose wife was tragically killed at a crossing at a Mississippi truck stop failed to allege facts sufficent to defeat a motion for directed verdict, Mississippi Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision. Plaintiff's lawyers had alleged that the truck stop operators negligently failed to provide adequate lighting and had placed a propane tank and advertising in its parking lot, obstructing the view of pedestrians and drivers of oncoming traffic. But the Mississippi Supreme Court found that the danger of crossing the public roadway should have been obvious to the truck driver's wife. Four of the judges disagreed, finding that even though the truck stop did not own the area in question, there was testimony at trial that it was generally known that truckers parked in the area, even those that were not customers at the truck stop. Unfortunately for the Plaintiff, he was one judge short.

February 29, 2008

Oregon and Colorado Consider Raising Caps of Damages in Personal Injury Cases

The TortsProf Blog reports that state legislatures in Colorado and Oregon are considering increases to their caps on noneconomic damages. Colorado is currently debating a bill that would raise the cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases from a measly $300,000 to a less measly, but still ridiculously low, $450,000. The bill was voted out of committee on Monday and will now be sent to the Senate floor for debate. The details are here.

Oregon is wrestling with a last year’s Oregon Supreme Court ruling that caps on damages payable by the state was unconstitutional as applied. The task force has been set up in Oregon to study the issue of raising the cap on noneconomic damages.

In the history of caps on noneconomic damages, the door has swung only one way - toward adding caps or decreasing the amount of the cap. Hopefully, this news for the clients of personal injury lawyers, that the door will begin to swing in the other direction.

February 11, 2008

Pennsylvania Jury Verdict of $10.2 Million for Paralyzed Teenager

The Insurance Journal reports that a Pennsylvania jury awarded $10.2 million to a teenager who paralyzed in a drunken driving crash while wearing a lap belt in the backseat of a Volkswagen.

The verdict assigned 51 percent of the liability to the drunk driver, 39 percent to Volkswagen and 10 percent to the utility company who owned the pole utility to the pole that the driver hit.

There is no way to be sure but I suspect this case was all about Volkswagon. The drunk driver I’m sure already tendered their policy of insurance, whatever that was. The utility company also settled before trial. But Volkswagen owes Plaintiff over $3.9 million. This sounds like a lot but she has already incurred about $5 million in medical bills.

Plaintiff injury’s in this case is called submarining. This is where the accident victim, usually a child or smaller adult, slips underneath the lap belt during a car accident, causing the belt to ride up on the abdomen leading to internal injuries. Typically, this person is sitting in middle of the backseat. Because the middle seat is infrequently used, it has largely been ignored by car manufacturers with regard to passenger safety in car accidents. Finally, the federal government stepped in and mandated that new cars sold after September 1, 2007 in the United States must have a combination lap and shoulder belt in all back seat positions, including the middle seat.

December 27, 2007

Ohio Supreme Court

The Ohio Supreme Court has concluded that Ohio’s statutory caps on damage awards in personal-injury lawsuits are constitutional in a 5-2 decision today.

Like most states with caps, the cap applies to pain and suffering damages and other intangible injuries. The Ohio cap is particularly restrictive: $350,000 unless the injured person lost a limb or bodily organ. Ohio also has a punitive damages rule that restricts punitive damages to twice the amount of damages awarded as the judge or jury awards in compensation for the plaintiff’s injuries, minus any reductions as a result of the cap on pain and suffering damage. (Actually, the formula is a little more complicated than that but this is the gist of it.)

In this case, the plaintiff filed a product liability case against Johnson & Johnson claiming she suffered blood clots as a result of having used the Ortho Evra Birth Control Patch, a hormonal birth-control patch.

Two justices dissented. Justices Paul E. Pfeifer wrote that, "Today is a day of fulfilled expectations for insurance companies and manufacturers of defective, dangerous or toxic products that cause injury to someone in Ohio… But this is a sad day for our Constitution and this court. And this is a tragic day for Ohioans, who no longer have any assurance that their Constitution protects the rights they cherish."

Interesting, Justice Pfeifer also noted that in deciding to cap damages, the Ohio legislature relied on studies which were not "peer-reviewed" or "published in a scholarly journal." While this might not be a reason to ignore the legislative intent, because presumably the legislature can decide what they decide for any reason they want, it does underscore the faulty data that insurance companies and big business uses to rig or construe the data in such a way to create a crisis when one does not exist. For a great example of this from medical malpractice insurers, click here.