Share

Personal Injury

Monday, May 22, 2017

Underinsured and At-Fault

Almost all states require some form of auto coverage insurance. This may include Bodily Injury Coverage, Personal Injury Protection, Property Damage Liability, Collision Coverage, and even Uninsured Motor Coverage. Depending on the state, the coverage level will vary greatly. For instance, you may only be required by to carry $25,000 in bodily injury coverage. While a relative residing across the country may be required to carry $50,000 in bodily injury coverage.  And while mandated requirements are often used as guides by drivers when selecting their policies, these coverage levels are not always enough to cover the cost of an accident. So what happens if you are underinsured and at fault in an accident?

The course of action will vary greatly depending on whether you are in a state with no-fault laws or traditional tort insurance laws. In states with no-fault laws, your insurance company will pay your damages while the other party’s insurance company will be responsible for theirs so if you choose to carry low levels of coverage the amount you receive after an accident will be capped by the coverage you selected. In states where traditional tort insurance laws exist, fault is established and the party at fault is responsible for the damages. If the driver at fault is underinsured in a traditional tort state, both parties may be in trouble.

Following the accident, your insurance company will seek to settle all claims as soon as possible. Even if you carry the lowest possible coverage, your insurer is responsible for your legal representation. If the opposing party has injuries exceeding your coverage level, and has Underinsured or Uninsured Motor Coverage, he or she may be able to collect the difference from this policy. However, if they don’t have this extra protection net from their own insurer or the damages exceed the policy limits, the injured party may file a lawsuit against you where your personal assets are at risk. 

In selecting an auto insurance policy, you might consider purchasing coverage above the minimum limits to protect your assets and livelihood. While a limit of $25,000 may seem high, the costs of healthcare continue to soar and just a one week stay at a hospital following an accident can easily exceed that amount.

 


Monday, May 8, 2017

Respondeat Superior and Vicarious Liability

The first question an attorney must ask when filing a lawsuit is who is responsible for the damages to his or her client. A lawyer must figure out who to name as a party in the lawsuit. This is incredibly important, because, if the wrong parties are named, the victim may be left with no way to recover for the injuries suffered. This would be a travesty of justice and is unacceptable.

It is prudent to name every party that might be responsible when filing a lawsuit. Only an attorney can make the determination as to who might be liable for an individual’s personal injuries. It is particularly important to make sure that the parties who are named are capable of contributing to the damages, either through wealth or insurance. For example, if a person who does not normally drive and has no insurance is borrowing a friend’s car, and causes a car accident, that person is likely to be unable to pay for the damage he or she caused. Similarly, if a person makes a mistake while working and causes personal injury, that individual may be the one who caused the injury, but the individual is not the only one who can be held accountable for the pain and suffering.

The legal doctrine of Respondeat Superior is Latin for “let the master answer.” It places vicarious liability on any third party that had the right, ability, or duty to control the individual who caused a personal injury. Respondeat Superior is one of the oldest traditions in the practice of law. It predates our Constitution and goes back to English Common Law. Without it, corporations and municipalities would have little reason to enforce standards of care among their employees. Employers would avoid liability for their employee’s negligence, but injured people would have no way to collect money damages for their pain and suffering. Respondeat Superior is an integral part of American jurisprudence. The most common uses of this doctrine are to hold employers liable for the actions or omissions of their employees, to hold owners of property liable for the negligence of those allowed to use that property, and to hold parents liable for their unsupervised children. 


Monday, April 17, 2017

Can You Sue City Hall?

Many individuals mistakenly believe that they cannot sue city hall, but this is not the case. Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, town, city, county and state governments were once protected from most lawsuits. Today, those rules have been scaled back to some extent, and the government can be held responsible for personal injuries and property damage or unlawful conduct. Let's take a look at personal injury and other lawsuits that can be brought against government entities.

There are a number of ways the government can be held liable for accidents and injuries. For example an individual who is injured in a slip and fall accident at a government office or facility may have grounds for a premises liability lawsuit. Similarly, a motorist or passenger who is injured in an accident with a government owned truck or car, or a motor vehicle being driven by a government employee or contractor while conducting official business, can bring a personal injury lawsuit.

In an addition, an employment lawsuit can be brought by a government employee for harassment, discrimination or wrongful termination against his or her government employer. Finally, law enforcement agencies can be sued for a wide range of civil rights violations.

In short, there are a number of legal claims that can be brought against the government. It is important to note that there are differences between suing the government and suing a private person or business.

For example, the time period to bring a personal injury claim against the government , referred to as the statute of limitations, is typically much shorter.  Further, before filing a lawsuit, it is also necessary to provide a Notice of Claim to the government, agency, or employee within a set time period notifying them that a lawsuit will be brought. Lastly, many states require individuals to file an administrative claim with a government agency before filing a civil case in court.

In the end, it is possible to sue city hall, so to speak, but there are a number of hurdles that need to be crossed. Moreover, some governments may still be immune from certain injury claims, depending on the state in which you live. If you were injured due to the negligent or illegal conduct of a government entity or employee, you should speak to an experienced attorney.


Monday, March 27, 2017

Insurance Bad Faith

 

If you or a loved one is injured in an accident you may be entitled to compensation which usually means dealing with an insurance company. Although insurers have an advantage because they have teams of attorneys and experts, the law requires insurance companies to treat claimants and policyholders fairly. While there may be legitimate reasons to deny a claim, an insurer that fails to engage in good faith and fair dealing may be held liable for bad faith.

What is bad faith?

Bad faith is a legal term for an insurer denying a claim without a reasonable basis. In first party insurance situations, bad faith arises when an insurance company denies a claim without a valid reason. In third party insurance situations, bad faith occurs when an insurer fails to defend or indemnify the policyholder without a valid reason.

Proving bad faith varies from state to state. In some states, it is necessary to show that the insurer failed to conduct a thorough investigation. Other states have a higher a higher threshold that requires proving the insurance company missed or ignored obvious facts or information in denying a claim. A stricter standard that some states rely on requires demonstrating an insurer intentionally conducted an inadequate investigation.

Generally, it is not necessary to demonstrate that the insurer denied a claim merely to advance its interest at the expense of the claimant. On the other hand, an insurance company that makes a mistake or error in denying a claim cannot be held liable for bad faith. Lastly, an insurer that is shown to follow a pattern or practice of not adhering to state regulations governing claims investigation can be held liable for bad faith.

What can I do if I have been the victim of bad faith?

If you have been the victim of bad faith on the part of an insurance company you have options. By engaging the services of an experienced insurance law attorney, you may be able to recover damages from the insurance company. These damages include the amount the insurance company should have paid out for the initial claim, as well as additional damages arising from the bad faith denial.


Monday, March 13, 2017

Negligence Claims Against the Government

When an individual is wronged or injured by a federal agency or government employee, that person may have an actionable negligence claim against the government. It is necessary to seek legal counsel to determine whether or not the government is immune in this particular case or whether a legitimate claim can be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).

Pursuant to the FTCA, if the incident arose from an act by a federal employee who was “acting in the scope of” his or her employment, an action may be brought.  Claims against the government, however, are often complex, burdened with various restrictions.  It is always advisable to consult with an attorney in such cases, rather than attempting to bring a lawsuit independently.

The FTCA does not extend liability to every individual associated with the government, and claims are only permitted under certain circumstances.  For example, independent contractors employed by the government are only included under the act in exceptional cases.  Most often only a claim of negligence can be brought, rather than a complaint for deliberate wrongdoing.  Furthermore, the claim must be grounded upon, and cannot conflict with, state law.  

There are several steps to be taken in filing a lawsuit against the government. First and foremost, within two years from the date of the incident, an administrative claim must be filed with the agency that allegedly caused harm.  In order for the claim to be considered and investigated, a form has to be filed which includes all relevant facts and requested damages.  The claim for damages is limited; punitive damages are not typically an option. 

If and when the agency discards the claim, in whole or in part, a suit may be filed within six months of the date on the decision letter.  In most cases, all administrative remedies must be fully exhausted before seeking legal action.  If the agency does not respond, however, the complainant may be permitted to proceed with the lawsuit.  An attorney can best advise whether an action can be filed, whether the government has any plausible defense, and whether it is in the client's best interest to settle the case.  


Monday, February 13, 2017

Defamation - Breaking it Down

Defamation has two basic forms: “libel,” the written form, and “slander,” the spoken form.  To establish either type, certain elements must be present. The false statement must be "published" and the false statement must result in injury. In terms of defamation accusations, “published” does not mean publication in a newspaper, magazine, or book— a statement is considered to be "published" when another party sees or hears it. In this context, speaking loudly enough to be heard by a third party may be considered "publication." False statements can also be made not only through spoken or written words, but by presentation of images or symbols.

There are, however, exceptions that make individuals immune to liability. These include absolute and qualified "privilege" and apply in special situations, such as in communications between spouses, in governmental proceedings, or in statements made in self-defense.

Privilege is not the only defense against accusations of defamation. Truth of the assertion is an “absolute defense” to an accusation of defamation.  A statement is not actionable or defamatory if it is honest. Likewise, a statement of opinion cannot be defamatory. 

Furthermore, one cannot recover damages for defamation if there has not been resulting injury or damage to the reputation of the other party.  Examples of damage include loss of employment, harassment, and loss of business contacts or friends.  It should be noted that public officials are less likely to be shielded from defamatory content.  Beyond proving the above-stated elements, a public official may be required to demonstrate the existence of “actual malice.”  "Actual malice" is generally defined as making a statement with knowledge that it was not truthful, or with “reckless disregard” for the honesty of the declaration. 

The discovery process in defamation cases may be lengthy because the jury must analyze all of the circumstantial evidence surrounding the statement in question.  Factors to be considered may consist of the place where the declaration was made, the relationship of the accuser to the accused, and the reasons or motives behind the assertion. Because of the complexities involved in defamation cases, expert advice from a licensed attorney is essential.


Monday, January 23, 2017

What if more than one party is responsible for my injuries?


If you were injured in an accident, it may be possible to hold another individual accountable by pursuing a personal injury lawsuit. In some cases, however, more than one person may be responsible for your injuries. In these circumstances you may still be compensated under the doctrine of comparative fault: the allocation of responsibility under the theories of contributory and comparative negligence.

Contributory Negligence

In the few states that still rely on the contributory negligence approach, individuals have a duty to act reasonably and not put one's self at risk of injury. This means that if a plaintiff is even partially responsible for the accident, he or she may be barred from recovering damages.
Read more . . .


Monday, December 26, 2016

What is tort reform and what are some of the criticisms of it?

Tort reform is the name commonly given to a proposed solution to the rising healthcare costs in America.  Some people believe that medical malpractice lawsuits are the main reason why the United States has such high healthcare costs.  The argument is that because doctors are afraid of being sued, they have to conduct more tests than is reasonable.  Essentially, doctors complain that they are forced to be too thorough.  Also, it is believed that hospital bills are high because malpractice insurance premiums are high.  Therefore, by limiting the maximum amount that a Plaintiff could win in a lawsuit, malpractice insurance costs would be reduced, doctors would be free to practice as they see fit and prescribe fewer tests, and the savings would be passed on to the patients. 

This line of thought is not without criticism.  While doctors and insurance companies would surely benefit greatly from putting a cap on the amount of money damages awarded in medical malpractice awards, there is no cap on the amount of damage a doctor might do by making a mistake.  In the case of Colin Gourley, an OBGYN’s negligent prenatal care of Colin’s mother led to the boy being born with severe birth defects including physical, cognitive, and behavioral problems.  He was quickly diagnosed with cerebral palsy.  He will require round the clock care for his entire life.  A jury found that the hospital and the doctor should be responsible for these costs, and awarded the family $5,625,000.00 to cover the damages.  However, because of a law capping damages in such a case, their award was limited to $1.25 million, leaving a middle-income family with a bill of $4,000,000.00 that they had no means of paying.  This is only one case of many which demonstrates the real cost of putting a cap on damages.

The consequences of tort reform affect those who suffer the most as a result of medical mistakes.  Also, the amount of the cap is arbitrary and inherently unfair to those who were mistreated by the medical professionals in the first place.  The proponents of tort reform might better serve society by putting their efforts into lowering healthcare costs by coming up with a way to reduce medical error and inefficiencies. 


Monday, December 12, 2016

Auto Recalls and the Dangers They Seek to Avoid

Automakers recall millions of vehicles every year. A recall seeks to reach out to consumers to return faulty products, mistakenly put in the marketplace, for repair. In 2014, more than 60 million vehicles were recalled, nearly doubling the previous record set in 2004. These automobiles all had some sort of defect. Some of the defects, while annoying, were not of serious concern, such as a faulty air conditioners, while others resulted in significant safety issues, like problems with the ignition switches, brakes, or steering. Honda issued a recall of 14 million vehicles because its airbags might shoot sharp pieces of metal into the car when deploying.

Of the 60 million cars that were recalled in 2014, less than half were actually repaired. Consumers may not be aware of the recall. Cars change hands several times, and dealers have trouble reaching out to everyone who might have the car. Several major car manufacturers have been caught purposely misleading regulators and consumers about recalls to save money. Toyota recently paid a $1.2 billion fine for this improper action. Even when everyone is aware that a recall has been issued, a consumer may not prioritize it. When consumers are able to bring their automobiles in for the recall, the part necessary for the repair may be unavailable, especially on older model cars that are no longer in production.

This leaves millions of automobiles on the road every year that may pose significant safety issues. Wiring issues can increase the risk of car fires. Vehicle components could break resulting in loss of control of the vehicle. Seat belts might be defective. Windshield wipers might not work properly. All of these problems make the roads less safe for drivers of these vehicles and everyone else on the road.

If a consumer is injured as a result of an issue caused by an automobile defect, he or she may have a substantial claim against the auto manufacturer. If the defect has caused a collision, the car company may be responsible for all injuries. A consultation with an experienced attorney is necessary to determine whether or not a claim is viable in a particular situation. 

 


Monday, November 21, 2016

Cycling Risks & Injuries

Each year, thousands of Americans take to the roads on bicycles. This mode of transportation is touted as being more cost-effective and more environmentally friendly than motor vehicles but when it comes to safety, cycling can come with a much greater risk. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 39,000 individuals were injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2012. That same year, 724 cyclists lost their lives following accidents on the roads.

In addition to the dangers of moving vehicles, cyclists often suffer injury from being “doored”; this occurs when a driver, or passenger, of a stopped vehicle, suddenly opens the door into a cyclist’s path of travel. Injury can also occur from street defects, such as large pot holes or uneven manhole covers that can cause the cyclist to lose control. If you’ve suffered an injury while riding your bike, it’s important that you consult a personal injury attorney who has experience representing cyclists. Unlike other accidents, cycling accidents have a number of unique considerations; these include:

Insurance Coverage May Be Different for Cycling Accidents
Many attorneys have litigated car accident cases and may assume that the insurance process works the same way for cycling incidents, but this is rarely the case. In fact, many states have unique rules regarding the minimum coverage and payouts when a cyclist collides with a motor vehicle, even when the driver of the vehicle isn’t found to have been negligent.

The Laws of the Road Differ for Cyclists
In determining fault, your attorney must understand the roles and duties of all parties involved. When it comes to cycling accidents, few are intimately familiar with the laws that apply to cyclists but such knowledge is imperative for case success.

The Injuries Are Different
Injuries sustained when riding a bike are vastly different from those sustained when driving, or riding in, a car.An attorney who has represented injured cyclists will likely have a much better idea of how much money will be required for immediate and long-term treatment.

As experienced personal injury attorneys, our firm can help you through the complex litigation process following  a cycling injury and help you receive the compensation you need to recover, and get back on that bike as soon as possible.

 


Monday, October 31, 2016

Where Can You Bring a Personal Injury Lawsuit

Accidents happen and we do not have any control over their circumstances, including the location where they occur.  You might be injured while passing through or spending significant time in a state other than the one you live in.  If you are, you might become worried that it will be difficult to recover for your injuries or that you may be unable to recover at all.  This is not the case, as you can sue to recover for personal injuries in a variety of states, depending upon the circumstances of your case.

In order for a court to hear a particular case, it must have jurisdiction.  There are two types of jurisdiction and both are required.  Subject matter jurisdiction relates to the type of case being brought.  For example, a family court can only hear certain cases that relate to domestic relations.  The subject matter jurisdiction of a court is decided by statute.  Personal jurisdiction is the courts ability to decide a case on behalf of a particular party.  Usually, personal jurisdiction rules are examined in relation to a defendant.

For the most part, if the defendant that caused your injuries resides in or does business in a particular state, you can bring a lawsuit in that state.  When the defendant does not do business in or reside in the state where you want to bring a lawsuit, the rules become a bit more complex.  A lawsuit can be brought in any state where service of process was affected.  This means that as long as the person was served with the requisite legal paperwork in the state, the lawsuit can be brought there.  Also, simply put, a defendant can be sued in any state where they have a reasonable amount of contacts.  This is decided on a case by case basis, but, the general theory is that if a defendant could have reasonably known that they may be sued in a particular state, the suit can be brought there. 

Many personal injury actions result from automobile accidents of some kind.  Each state has a statute granting it jurisdiction to decide suits stemming from automobile accidents that occur on their roads.  When you drive in a particular state, you are consenting to be subject to a lawsuit there should you be involved in an accident.  These motorist statutes are often utilized by personal injury attorneys.

The rules relating to where a lawsuit can be brought can be complicated and difficult to understand.  If you were injured and are concerned about where to bring a lawsuit, contact us for a case evaluation today.


Archived Posts

2017
2016
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2015
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2014
2013
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January

← Newer12 3 4 5 6 7 8 Older →


Lawrence M. Gordon, Attorney at Law, P.C. has offices in Garden City, NY and assists clients throughout Long Island, including: the north shore of Long Island, The Town Of Oyster Bay, The Town Of North Hempstead, The Town Of Hempstead, The Town Of Huntington, Nassau & Suffolk Counties & throughout the Five Boroughs of The City Of New York.



© 2017 Lawrence M. Gordon, Attorney at Law, P.C. | Attorney Advertising
300 Garden City Plaza, Suite 450, Garden City, NY 11530
| Phone: 516-333-5000 | 800-628-1620

Practice Areas

Law Firm Website Design by
Amicus Creative