there is one but its toothless. basically if the insurance company responds to your demand in 30 days and states any reason why they made their decision to not pay they're good. legislature tried to pass a law over the summer where we could get our fees paid if we get a bad faith verdict but it didn't pass.
100 car wrecks a day in houston makes it hard to move. and i'm not crying poverty or anything. it's just frustrating that this is how they've decided to do business. the people it fucks are my clients. to get the $30k first party claim i'm going to have to spend $10k getting a verdict and my fees will be 40%. my client isn't going to get shit.
From my experience, large national carriers (with the exception of allstate) typically treat all bad faith as if it is Florida. Alabama is as insurer-friendly a state as their is, and we still don't see anything remotely close to what you're talking about.
it's' not just me. i've talked to the defense lawyers who handle this and they just say that's what is going on at their "firms"
before all of the republican judges were voted out in harris county (houston) the avg pain and suffering on a run of the mill auto case was ~$2,500. that's slowly changing with the new wave of democrats, but that is sort of what we are dealing with. i've also tried 0 cases against GEICO and honestly never even been that close. they're just going to make me work it up, spend $8k on doctor depos, and then offer like $38k of their $50k policy limit and we will take it
no they were jury trials but the judges would make bullshit rulings. oh you don't have an expert and are stipulating to liability cool we will still let the low pd pictures in now they're making bullshit rulings the other way
Man, I'm pretty pro-plaintiff for a defense lawyer, but making the argument that photographs of the accident shouldn't come in is downright absurd. I get being prohibited from making the argument that low impact couldn't result in the injury without an expert, but juries deserve to be able to see pictures of the accident. I've seen plenty of Plaintiff's lawyers handle the "low visible property damage" but bad injury effect well.
Sammy Meatballs boy Keith Mitnik has a great suggestion. Look at episode 5: https://www.keithmitnik.com/products/podcast/ A lawyer I've tried several with once told a story about his kid doing one of those egg drop things in science class and how the egg kept breaking when the contraption didn't. In a later case, I used the same analogy in reverse when there was a ton of property damage and not a lot of injury.
Anyone here practice med mal? Have a trial coming up soon regarding a failure to diagnose a brain tumor in a kid. Kid's now blind/mentally disabled. Was hoping to get some thoughts about my client's position/chances. Can PM me for more details.
the vast majority of the defense lawyers i deal with are reasonable a lot of the adjusters they work with are not though
That's why you also need seasoned defense lawyers whose opinions carry weight. Stay where you are Tegg.
would love to have the dynamics yall all work with 2/3 of my cases are with salaried employees of the insurance companies. i don't think the insurance companies give a single fuck about what their opinion of the case is
The last two states I’ve lived in require drivers to carry UM/UIM. Barring unusual circumstances, I always try to meet with clients in person before taking a case and introduce them to whatever para will assist me with it. Goes a long way towards preventing that type of conflict. Also in auto accident cases, I explain to them in that initial meeting the concept of UM/UIM coverage. Goes double if you’re in a jurisdiction that permits stacking because you’ll potentially need all the insurance info, not just the auto.
I’ve been outside counsel for 3 years now and trying to suss out when to make the move. Longer you stay it just gets so much harder to justify the paycut but those hours look beautiful from here
Spoiler: Legal question inside Insurer doesn't defend insured. Insured and claimant stipulate to arbitration, insured pays 10k and assigns claims against insurer for a covenant not to execute. Arbitration award is upwards of half a million. Claimant sues insurer. In a SJ order, Court finds that there was a duty to defend, but under the decision by the arbitrator, there was no duty to indemnify. Now, going to trial, plaintiff wants award of consequential damages for insurer's breach, which they say include the entirety of the half a million-ish judgment. If examining consequential damages as damages that arose naturally from the breach and were reasonably foreseeable at the time of contract, should consequential damages involve the entire judgment? Was the big arbitration award a consequence of the failure to defend? if you defend and it turns out there is no indemnity, you owe the entire judgment and defense costs. With the covenant not to execute, you are only on the hook for 10k. Trying to think about how to formulate a damages argument stating that an entire judgment is not automatically a consequence of an insurer’s breach of its duty to defend
I was doing worker's comp defense. Felt if I didn't leave when I did, I would have been pigeonholed in that field forever.
Gallant Knight I've always said the same thing regarding UM. But I've changed how I handle it. I can't find law that says it's illegal to increase the premium because of a UM claim in MS but I tell them it will not increase their premium. I've had defense lawyers that work super close with insurance companies tell me the rates don't go up. I let the clients know that and it seems to have made a huge difference. I also do what you said which is explain to them that there is no point in having UM and paying the premiums if you aren't going to use it.
It will depend on the specific policy, the nature of the loss, and the jurisdiction’s laws. A breach of the duty to defend doesn’t automatically create a duty to indemnify against the entire judgment.
Agree with you. Just seems like after the insurance company decided not to defend, this guy went and got counsel, admitted full liability, went to an arbitrator to solidify the agreement, and then paid 10K to avoid any execution of the judgment. Seems weird that a jury has the option of putting the entire judgment on the insurance company when the insured party (who committed the wrong) cut a deal that created this ballooned judgment. I guess one could argue that this outcome is a consequence of failing to defend him. Just seems contrived.
It’s definitely contrived, and it sounds like collusion. I would think unclean hands would be a pretty viable defense to anything beyond cost of defense.
Just got a letter from Blue Cross Blue Shield waiving a $60k lien in a wrongful death med mal case. Made my day. I sent them the below letter requesting a reduction: Our firm recently resolved a wrongful death medical malpractice lawsuit on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries of _____against George County Hospital. Said lawsuit settled for $200,000.00. The underlying facts were that __________presented to the ER at George Regional Hospital on March 20, 2016, complaining of neck pain and a severe headache. We alleged that she was misdiagnosed with a cervical strain and tension headache and was released with no diagnostic testing. Early the next morning, she returned to George County Hospital. CT scans were obtained revealing multiple venous thrombi and a possible subarachnoid hemorrhage. At that time, she was transferred to the University of Mississippi Medical Center. She was treated there until her death on March 30, 2016. Several factors inherently limited the overall recovery in this matter. First, George County Hospital is a political subdivision of the State of Mississippi. Therefore, the Mississippi Tort Claim Act applied and limited the overall damages to $500,000. Next, George County is a conservative venue where Plaintiffs almost never win medical malpractice cases. Also, the defendant had strong liability defenses including that many individuals complain of headaches at the ER without a CT scan being administered. Accordingly, our $200,000 settlement was a best-case scenario considering strong liability defenses, the damages cap, and the conservative venue. The Estate of _________ is currently being probated in the Chancery Court of George County. Ms. _________ has eight (8) wrongful death beneficiaries. Should Blue Cross Blue Shield receive the entirety of its subrogation claim, the wrongful death beneficiaries would not be made whole. This is illustrated in the following: $200,000.00 -$80,000.00 (Attorney’s Fees) -$10,928.43 (Attorney’s Expenses) -$66,138.92 (BCBS Lien) $42.932.65= Total net proceeds to the wrongful death beneficiaries. Therefore, each beneficiary would receive $5,366.58. We also believe that Blue Cross Blue Shield is not entitled to subrogation regarding charges from University Medical Center. The healthcare at UMC would have been necessary regardless of any negligence. If a CT scan was taken the first time Ms. _____ presented to the ER, medications could have been administered to save her life. Unfortunately, Ms. _________-still would have required advanced care necessitating a transfer to UMC. Further, we also believe that the Chancery Court in the Estate of ___________ has jurisdiction and discretion to equitably reduce Blue Cross Blue Shield’s subrogation claim. Finally, Ms. _________ received her health insurance benefits through state, not private, employment. Therefore, Blue Cross Blue Shield is not entitled to the protection of ERISA lien law. Additionally, a forensic economist, Dr. George Carter, calculated the economic damages of Ms. ______ at $1,604,665. Please see attached report. Also, but/for the tort claim act caps, Ms. _______ family would have recovered non-economic damages of $1,000,000. Therefore, those combined damages are $2,604,665. $200,000 represents only 7.6% of those damages. We believe that Blue Cross Blue Shield’s recovery should parallel the damages recovery outlined herein. We are therefore requesting that Blue Cross Blue Shield accept 7.6% of their alleged subrogation claim. If BCBS agrees to accept 7.6% of their subrogation claim,the net settlement to the wrongful death beneficiaries is as follows: $200,000.00 -$80,000.00 (Attorney’s Fees) -$10,928.08 (costs) -$5,026.56 (BCBS Lien) $104,045.36 -Net recovery for wrongful death beneficiaries. $13,005.67 per wrongful death beneficiary Please advise in writing whether Blue Cross Blue Shield will agree to the above referenced reduction. If you have any questions, comment or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me regarding this matter.
One good thing about Alabama's punitive-only wrongful death statute is that providers can't subrogate against a recovery.
It cuts both ways. It also allows you to get into a lot of "bad facts" for the defendant that you otherwise could not in a negligence case.
What is the best way you've seen a Plaintiff lawyer handle an admitted liability rear end car accident case with soft tissue injuries? To me it takes a lot of the sting out of the Plaintiff's case when the defendant admits liability and turns the entire case into a focus on the extent of the client's damages. You basically say this was unfortunate but the plaintiff is not nearly as hurt as she is claiming , she was done treating in 6 weeks, and she made all of us come here and waste time because she's greedy. Juries already have a negative attitude about MVA cases before they step into the court room. Especially in a case where the Plaintiff only has a soft tissue claim that resolved after a few months. I have those exact facts in a case in a jury trial coming up in a month and a half. Last time I did a jury trial with those facts it didnt' go very well for me. This time I'm planning on owning up to the fact that it isn't some sort of catastrophic injury and being candid with the jury. I'm planning to only ask for the medicals plus 10-15k in pain and suffering. My theory is that if you aren't greedy it will go a long way. FYI The defendant is more sympathetic by far than my client.
I'm doing the keenan edge trial system through the keenan trial institute. They have an entire class on admitted liability but I'm not going to do that prior to this trial.
4th Motion to Suppress Granted in 2019. Wrote one for a public defender that is being argued later today. That motion is strong, arguably should have been stipulated to. I'm adding it to the count if she wins.
incredible how fast the calendar goes by when always looking ahead at deadlines and future dates. weeks just fly by.
I have a buddy who absolutely nails those cases by being 100% candid and letting the jury know what the case is and what it isn't from voir dire on. When they do that, it's kind of hard to defend. Off the top of my head, here are some of the good strategies I've seen. (1) In most of those cases, a large portion of the medical bills ends up being diagnostic testing. I really love the angle that "it's perfectly reasonable to go get checked out after an accident." The doctor checked off on it, and agreed that they needed the testing. And, when the doctor decided to do it, he did it because he thought there could be something there. They're lucky therewasn't, but that test to confirm that there wasn't still costs money and that money has to get paid back. (2) Play up that your client wanted to get better and did. Emphasize that he/she isn't malingering and will tell the jury that he/she got better. Juries want to dislike a plaintiff for being greedy. Don't give them that chance. (3) With your ask, don't oversell it. Ask for the amount of money and say that "we feel like that's a reasonable amount to compensate her for her injury."
Another thing you can do, and it requires walking a tightrope to a degree, is play on the jury's sympathies toward inconvenience. Obviously, you can't be awarded damages for the inconvenience of litigation, but you can let the jury in on how the accident affected your life. You don't want to sound like this small whippy accident "changed everything," but you were without a car for a bit, had to take off work to go to the doctor and PT, felt like you were in a car wreck for a few weeks, and then had to wait for a few years before anybody did anything about it. You've got to be subtle, but you can plant the seeds for the jury that it's been three years since the accident, you've been fine for two years and eight months of that, and all you want is a pretty reasonable number, and they'll quickly lose patience with the defendant, who they more likely than not (thanks Morgan & Morgan) know has insurance.
Anyone here use or have used Litify (case management software)? I think our firm is moving to that and I’m pretty skeptical.
The imaging centers I manage the operations of are getting more into providing PIP/LOP MVA work. It’s literally the Wild Wild West down here.