Auto Accidents

August 23, 2011

Interesting Plaintiff’s Lawyer Tactics in State Farm Bad Faith Claim

Something interesting has come out of Alaska that does not involve Sarah Palin, oil, or snow. No, really, it’s true.

In Whitney v. State Farm, the Plaintiff had a serious injury case that far exceeded State Farm’s 100/300 policy. (Yeah, State Farm is writing those in Alaska too.) State Farm tendered the policy limits. Plaintiff’s counsel had an admirable but goofy theory why there were stacking policies on the risk where UM coverage applied.

Plaintiff’s accident lawyer then did something very interesting. He settled the case with the Defendant far in excess of the policy limits. This gave him a chance to skip a trial and immediately test his theory, bringing a bad faith claim under Alaska’s version of a use plaintiff. I’m sure he had some side deal with Plaintiff on collecting the settlement. I’m amazed the defendant’s State Farm lawyer – whose bills are being paid by State Farm – had the guts to craft a settlement was in the client’s best interests but not State Farm’s.

August 3, 2011

How and How Not to Reduce Drunk Driving Accidents

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Virginia is making great strides in cutting the number of drunk driving accidents. The path to success is not a secret: aggressive enforcement.

Virginia officials also cite increased driver education. This is bunk, and everyone knows it. Government officials must get performance incentives for citing education as the cure for everything.

Malcolm Gladwell’s book The Tipping Point underscores how bad this paradigm fails elsewhere. Gladwell cites a study that shows that the average smoker overestimates how many years smoking will take off their lives. Smokers think it will cost them 9 years when the real answer is probably more like 6. Paradoxically, education may make these people less risk-averse to smoking. Continue reading

July 26, 2011

Inside the Mind of a Car Accident Claims Adjuster

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

This post was supposed to be about Medicare set-asides but I started with such a long intro about the psychology of claims adjusters that I’ll just hit the Medicare issue in a later post. (Or I’ll completely forget about it.)

To understand claims adjusters, get inside the labyrinth that is the claims adjuster’s mind. (Why labyrinth? I’m just trying to use mildly inflammatory language. I’ll stop.) Insurance claims adjusters are more Pete Rose than Barry Bonds: they get paid for singles, not home runs. The great things a claims adjuster does vanish into thin air; the mistakes live on. Ironically, plaintiffs’ lawyers operate in the exact opposite world: hit a few million-dollar verdicts in a row and everyone forgets your losses. Reason #42,353 why plaintiffs’ attorneys and insurance adjusters are the Montagues and Capulets.

Accident lawyers have a misconception about this, thinking adjusters get hugs from the higher-ups for ripping off a plaintiffs’ lawyer in a settlement negotiation. Actually, hugs is the wrong word – they do get hugs. But mostly, that’s it. The way to make a name for yourself is not by screwing plaintiffs’ lawyers but by not screwing up yourself. Make sure everyone likes you and don’t make any mistakes. Overpaying on an accident case is not that big of a screw up: but failure to have a death certificate in the file before paying a wrongful death case? That is a federal crime in the insurance world. Under-reserving a case? That’s an aggravated felony.
Continue reading

July 11, 2011

“State of Maryland Should Put Up a Jersey Wall” Opinion

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Maryland Court of Special Appeals reversed last week a Harford County judge’s dismissal of a claim against the state of Maryland for negligent failure to maintain, repair and reconstruct a bridge where accidents were beyond commonplace. Here, the bridge was the site of a fatal crossover car accident collision that led to the death of a young girl.

The Plaintiff’s claim is a Hail Mary: you should have erected a Jersey Wall because of the prior head-on and crossover accidents about which the state had notice. It is Hail Mary where, instead of throwing for the end zone, you are just trying to get a first down because the cap limits the claim to $200,000. Still, a lengthy line of Maryland cases have allowed individual suits against local municipalities for failure to properly maintain roads and sidewalks. The question is whether this same logic extends to claims against the State of Maryland.

Boy, this case has some powerful facts. The Director of Engineering for the Maryland Transportation Authority determined, well prior to this fatal crossover accident, that a concrete median barrier was both necessary and feasible. Plaintiff also claims the State of Maryland admitted in discovery that there had been a lengthy, unexplained and dangerous delay in installing that median barrier after the State realized it was a no-brainer to put up a Jersey Wall. Why a no-brainer? There had been 142 accidents on that bridge, according to Plaintiff. This is a “stop in your tracks” statistic. Continue reading

July 7, 2011

GEICO’s Valuation of a Wrongful Death Case

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I have an unbelievably tragic wrongful death car accident case. A very good man with an unbelievably good family – here’s a clue: they were/are very concerned about injuries sustained by the man that caused the car accident – was rear-ended by another car at a high rate of speed in Prince George’s County.

GEICO Sees Claims Different Than I Do

At first, liability was in serious question. The police report took forever. But, ultimately, the Prince George’s County Police got it right to where it would be virtually impossible to contend otherwise. Liability is clear.

The defendant has a minimum limits policy with Allstate. The decedent and his wife had a $300,000 underinsured motorist policy with GEICO that, while better than most personal car insurance policies, is still awful. GEICO wants us to jump through every single hoop: death certificate, medical records after the accident, and so forth. I’m cool with that, actually. GEICO has auditors, and they have to answer for the details of their file. I’m more than happy to do my job.

So I talk to the GEICO claims adjuster yesterday- who is a good claims adjuster and otherwise a nice person (and someone I’m still dealing with in 2019) – who throws out a “So, ultimately, what do you think this case should settle for?”

Bracketing for just a second how insulting it is to think I might fall for this, I’m wondering: what if I had said, “I think it is worth $200,000.” Does the adjuster then extend a settlement offer – to its own policyholder – a value of the case that is certainly far less than it is worth?

2019 Update: This case settled for the $300,000 policy limits without having to file a lawsuit.

July 6, 2011

Women Are Bad Drivers Says University of Michigan Study

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Women are bad drivers according to a new University of Michigan study. The study is too politically correct to say just that. These are serious people, not bloggers. But, really, it is impossible to ramrod any other conclusion from this study.

The study looked at 6.5 million car accidents and found that women cause more car accidents per mile driven than men. The study’s lead author found the difference “astounding.”

Maybe it is because she is looking the wrong way.

This is a very difficult argument to make. Not hard intellectually. But hard to make with a PC face on. Ultimately, I don’t think most women care much about this “attack” for the same reason I would not care about studies that show men are more violent and less caring. As long as you are not talking about me, you can say anything you want. Same goes for lawyers too. You think almost all personal injury lawyers are ambulance chasers? Fine. As long as you don’t include me, I’m cool. But there will be an outraged minority that will drive past the data and skip right to indignation. I’ve never really understood it, but I suspect it is outrage just because some people really enjoy being outraged. Look around your office. There are three people you can think of fast who love being outraged, right? Continue reading

May 26, 2011

Lawyer Pleads Guilty to Fraud

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Washington Post reports that a Maryland personal injury attorney pleaded guilty yesterday to insurance fraud. The lawyer worked with a chiropractor to submit false car insurance claims. Not content to cheat just for his clients, he brought his own bike accident claim and got an $11,000 settlement from an insurance company.

Wild story. It is very easy to get up on a soapbox and condemn, but it is too easy of a target. It is like writing a rant that Charlie Sheen is crazy. Everyone gets it.

This lawyer has “admitted full responsibility”, according to his lawyer. This is good. But, respectfully, criminal lawyers always talk too much. “[He] is devastated by his terrible judgment,” the lawyer added.

May 26, 2011

Medicare Liens: New and Better Law?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Almost two years ago now, Medicaid/Medicare liens became even more difficult to deal with as the law pushed to the lawyers and insurance companies the obligation of confirmation and resolution of Medicare/Medicaid liens. I’m sure betting an insurance company has yet to receive a fine for not verifying a lien before paying a personal injury settlement. But nobody wants to be the first.

Medicare, Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program Extension Act of 2007 created so many headaches people starting fighting back. In Haro v. Sebelius, an Arizona case in U.S. District Court, Medicare beneficiaries (and, interestingly, a personal injury lawyer in his own capacity) challenged – as a class – two things: (1) Can Medicare/Medicaid (hereinafter “Medicare because I’m sick of the slash) “require prepayment of a reimbursement claim before the correct amount is administratively determined where the beneficiary either appeals or seeks a waiver of the MSP reimbursement claim?, and (2) Are personal injury lawyers financially responsible for reimbursement if they do not hold or immediately turn over to Medicare their clients’ personal injury settlement awards.

Personal injury lawyers are completely in a pickle on these liens. Our clients want their money; we want to get them the money they are entitled to get. The question is whether personal injury attorneys are precluded from giving the clients their settlement money until after Medicare’s claim has been satisfied, and, let’s be honest, whether Medicare can recover the reimbursement claim directly from the attorney if the client cannot pay the reimbursement claim after the settlement money has been turned over to the client.

May 24, 2011

Attention Drunk Drivers: Expect a Roadblock on Route 40 Tomorrow

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

On this website [update: since taken down] soliciting drunk drivers, a nice heads up is provided as for drunks how to avoid specific sobriety checkpoints. This is just one post but most of the blog/website seems focused on giving a heads up which checkpoints to avoid.

I’m not sure why the police announce checkpoints. There is probably a statute or other logical reason that escapes me. But what does a website for DWI lawyers trying to accomplish in publishing this? A public service?

I am a big fan of sobriety checkpoints. I’m not a big fan of everyone chipping in to tip off the drunks. Lawyers who are paying for leads from these people really need to speak up. I will pose as a drunk driver and then lecture the lawyer who contacts me. (Actually, I’m not really going to do that.)

May 12, 2011

Maryland Insurance Liens in Accident and Malpractice Cases

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Subrogation allows insurers to recover the costs of reimbursing injured insured parties. Virtually every health insurance company involved in a car accident or medical malpractice case in Maryland demands repayment – to varying extents – of the money they have spent and have established various byzantine procedures for dealing with repayment of their subrogation interests. Sometimes, it is the toughest part of resolving any personal injury case.

Understandably, clients are astounded that their health insurance company demands to be paid back for the expenses they have incurred in an accident or medical malpractice claim. They never had to pay back any money their health care provider has paid in the past, including [fill in the blank bad thing that happened] to their family. So why now? The question has an answer but no one ever likes it. “So the insurance company gets paid back and keeps my premiums?” Logically, it is a hard sell.