RI Motorcycle Accident
343 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by David Slepkow from Rhode Island Personal Injury Attorney
Scoop.it!

Pursuing RI Fatal Accident Claim with a Wrongful Death Lawyer

Pursuing RI Fatal Accident Claim with a Wrongful Death Lawyer | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it

A wrongful death claim in Rhode Island could result from hundreds of different types of causes of actions including but not limited to: car accident, truck accident, bicycle accident, pedestrian death, slip and fall, assault, construction mishap, premises liability, negligent security, medical malpractice, product liability, motorcycle crash etc.

 

Seeking Compensation for a fatal car, semi truck or premises liability accident in RI.

 

A wrongful death lawsuit is a cause of action that must be filed to seek compensation for numerous types of damage that could include:

 

• A loss of income
• Related medical costs and hospital bills
• Funeral expenses
• Loss of consortium and companionship
• Loss of wages
• Loss of any future earnings and inheritance
• Pain, suffering and grief

 

Defining Wrongful Death

 

Wrongful death is a legal term concerning the loss of life through recklessness, negligence or the deliberate behavior of others. To receive compensation, the survivors or their legal representatives must establish a valid claim for wrongful death proving four specific points in a court of law that include:

 

• The parties at fault owed a legal DUTY to the victim
• The actions or lack of actions of parties at fault constitute a breach in that responsibility
• The breach of responsibility can be directly related to the death of the victim; and
• The victim died because of the incident

 

In a truck collision or vehicle accident case, the surviving family members (claimants) will need to establish how all parties responsible for the accident failed TO ACT REASONABLY AND WITH DUE CARE in some manner that led to the victim’s death. This could include failing to drive in a reasonable and safe manner, maintaining the roadways properly, ensuring that the vehicle components are not defective or other factors.

 

 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Arkansas Accident Slip and Fall & Premises Laibility - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

Arkadelphia | Batesville | Benton | Blytheville | Cabot | Conway | El Dorado |Fayetteville | Fort Smith | Gentry | Harrison | Heber Springs | Hot Springs National Park | Jacksonville | Jonesboro | Little Rock | North Little Rock |Paragould | Rogers | Russellville | Searcy | Springdale | Texarkana | West Memphis 375 S.W.3d 685 (2010)2010 Ark. App. 413 Anthony JENNINGS, Appellant v. ARCHITECTURAL PRODUCTS, INC., Appellee. No. CA 09-529.Court of Appeals of Arkansas.May 12, 2010. “We thus turn to the merits of this case. At the trial, Mr. Jennings testified about the alleged slip-and-fall accident that occurred on …
David Slepkow's insight:

The goal of discovery is to permit a litigant to obtain whatever information he may need to prepare adequately for issues that may develop without imposing an onerous burden on his adversary. Dodson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 345 Ark. 430, 47 S.W.3d 866 (2001). Imposition of sanctions for failure to provide discovery rests in the trial court’s discretion, and among the sanctions that may be imposed is prohibiting the introduction of evidence. See Coulson Oil Co. v. Tully, 84 Ark.App. 241, 139 S.W.3d 158 (2003). The supreme court has found an abuse of discretion where there has been an undue limitation of substantial rights of the appellant under the prevailing circumstances. Allen v. Greenland, 347 Ark. 465, 65 S.W.3d 424 (2002).

The thrust of Mr. Jennings’ argument is that his late production of the medical documents had no adverse effect on the appellee because Architectural Products was already in possession of all of the documents he intended to introduce. He correctly asserts that three weeks prior to trial, Architectural Products filed with the circuit clerk a “notice of filing medical records to plaintiff,” which was accompanied by hundreds of pages of medical records and bills. Mr. Jennings asserts that the medical documents filed by Architectural Products consisted of every record related to his injuries resulting from his fall at the appellee’s business. Mr. Jennings submits that because all of the medical documents he wished to introduce had already been in the appellee’s possession for at least three weeks, the appellee was not surprised and he should have been allowed to admit them into evidence. Mr. Jennings contends that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding the medical bills and records, and that the abuse of discretion placed an undue limitation on his substantial rights because he was prevented from presenting proof of the nature and extent of his injuries.

We hold that our review of this issue is precluded by appellant’s failure to make a proffer of his medical records and bills to the trial court. Arkansas Rule of Evidence 103(a)(2) provides:

important keywords: Slip and Fall accident, RI personal injury lawyer, Car Accidents Lawyer

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Anchorage Premises Liability Accident Law - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

872 P.2d 1213 (1994) Darlene NEWTON and Stan Newton, Appellants, v. Enid MAGILL and Estate of Fred Magill, dba Magill’s Trailer Park, Appellees. No. S-5219. Supreme Court of Alaska. April 29, 1994. Rehearing Denied May 17, 1994. Excerpt from the Alaska Supreme Court Slip and fall Premises Liability decision Newton v Magill set forth below: …
David Slepkow's insight:

The courts of a number of jurisdictions have begun to discard this common law rule, however, in favor of the principle that landlords are liable for injuries caused by their failure to exercise reasonable care to discover or remedy dangerous conditions. These courts have relied in part on statutory or common law warranties of habitability and in part on a belief that the rule of landlord immunity is inconsistent with modern needs and conditions.


The decision which began the trend imposing a general duty of care upon landlords was Sargent v. Ross, 113 N.H. 388, 308 A.2d 528 (N.H. 1973). Sargent involved the death of a tenant’s four-year-old daughter in a fall from an outdoor stairway attached to an apartment house. The tenant brought a wrongful-death action against the landlord, alleging negligence in the construction and maintenance of the stairway. Evidence indicated that the stairs were dangerously steep and the railing was insufficient to prevent the child from falling over the side. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff. Id. 308 A.2d at 529-30.


In affirming, the New Hampshire Supreme Court indicated that it might have analyzed the case as falling within an exception to the common law rule of landlord immunity, but declined to do so. Although the stairway was not a common passageway, the court might have strained to find that the landlord still retained some control over it; the court might also have found a hidden defect, at least as to the infant decedent; or the court might have found that the landlord had been negligent in making repairs to the stairway. Instead, the court stated: “We think that now is the time for the landlord’s limited tort immunity to be relegated to the history books where it more properly belongs.” Id. at 533. The court held that “landlords as other persons must exercise reasonable care not to subject others to an unreasonable risk of harm,” id. at 534, and, more fully, “[a] landlord must act as a reasonable person under all of the circumstances including the likelihood of injury to others, the probable seriousness of such injuries, and the burden of reducing or avoiding the risk.” Id.


important keywords: premises liability and slip and fall claims, Construction accidents

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Alaska Slip and Fall, Premises Accident Law - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

Anchorage | Fairbanks | Kenai Coleen L. MUELLER, Appellant, v. Lottie BUSCEMI and Geraldine Estabrook, individually and as Trustees of the Michael Nafla Irrevocable Trust, Appellees. No. S-12943. Supreme Court of Alaska. May 21, 2010. Excerpt from Alaska supreme Court Slip and Fall / Premises Liability case: “As a general rule, “evidence of prior or subsequent accidents is admissible …
David Slepkow's insight:

The Newtons describe Petersburg as a city where “constant drizzle” is “prevalent” except in the summer “when the rainfall is broken by periods of sun.” They contend that the wet climate fosters the growth of a plant organism on exposed wooden boards, causing them to become dangerously slippery when wet. To guard against this tendency, the Newtons contend that permanent installation 1216*1216 of some sort of anti-slip device is necessary. They argue that the general community standard in Petersburg is to install such devices.


Under the traditional common law rule governing the liability of a landlord, failure by the Magills to meet the community standard, assuming it exists, would be irrelevant. The traditional rule is that real property lessors are not liable to their tenants for injuries caused by dangerous conditions on the property. City of Fairbanks v. Schaible, 375 P.2d 201, 205 (Alaska 1962); Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 335, 356 (1965). There are exceptions to this rule of non-liability. If the dangerous condition is not reasonably apparent or disclosed,[1] if it exists on a part of the premises which remains subject to the landlord’s control,[2] if the landlord has undertaken to repair the condition,[3] or if the property is leased for a purpose which involves admission of the public,[4] the landlord is subject to liability for negligence. None of these exceptions applies to this case.


The general rule of landlord immunity follows from the conception of a lease as a conveyance of an estate in land under which the lessee becomes, in effect, the owner for the term of the lease. As such, the lease was subject to the principle of caveat emptor. The tenant had to “inspect the land for himself and take it as he finds it, for better or for worse.” William L. Prosser, Law of Torts § 63 at 400 (4th ed. 1971).


important keywords: premises liability and slip and fall claims, Construction accidents

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Rhode island Slip and Fall Lawyer | RI Premises Liability

Call RI Slip and fall Attorney David Slepkow 401-437-1100. Premises Liability, RI Personal Injury Lawyer. Get the settlement you deserve!
David Slepkow's insight:

The guardian/plaintiffs filed a Superior Court complaint against Toys R Us, alleging that Annie suffered injuries, including a fractured right ankle, when she fell in the Warwick Toys R Us store on December 29, 1993. The plaintiffs contended that Toys R Us knew or should have known of the unsafe condition on its premises that caused her to fall. After a trial before a Superior Court justice and a jury, but before the case was submitted to the jury, the trial justice granted Toys R Us’s motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Rule 50 of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure. On appeal, plaintiffs contend that there was sufficient evidence of negligence to submit the case to the jury. In addition, plaintiffs argue that the trial justice erred in allowing defendant to present evidence that Annie had fractured her other ankle in an unrelated incident two years prior to her fallin the Toys R Us store.”


“Annie, who was eleven years old at the time of trial and eight years old when the slip and fall occurred, testified that she and her mother went to the Toys R Us store in 188*188 Warwick on the night of December 29, 1993 in order to buy slides for a microscope that she had received as a Christmas present. She testified that there were long lines at the cash registers and that her mother decided to wait in line while she remained in the toy aisle. As Annie began to make her way toward her mother after her mother had beckoned to her, the youngster tripped over the base of a small basketball hoop and fell to the floor. After she fell, she noticed that the hoop was on its side, with the bottom of the structure jutting out from one of the side aisles into the main aisle. Annie stated that she did not see the hoop until after she fell.”


keywords: ri slip and fall accident, providence premises liability attorney

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

East Providence, RI Lawyer | Lawyer in East Providence, RI | David Slepkow, Attorney At Law

For more information about Lawyer services located in East Providence, RI please contact David Slepkow, Attorney At Law today. (401) 352-4969
David Slepkow's insight:

David Slepkow is a Rhode Island RI Personal Injury Lawyer/Attorney Practicing Personal Injury, Premises Liability, Motorcycle Accidents, Slip and Fall, Insurance Claims, Automobile /Auto/ Car Accidents, Slip and Fall and Serious Accidents. David has been practicing Law since 1997 and is licensed in Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Federal Court. David Also practices divorce and family law.

Services Rendered Include

  • No fee unless successful.
  • Home and hospital visits with evening and weekend appointments.
  • Aggressive and experienced attorney.
  • Firm Established in 1932
  • Get the settlement you deserve!
  • You will always consult with an attorney, not a paralegal.

David Slepkow is a Partner at Slepkow Slepkow & Associates Inc.  SS&A was established in 1932 and has a long history of timely and effective legal representation of clients.  There are currently six Attorneys at SS&A.  David is also a member of the Rhode Island Association for Justice.


important keywords: RI personal injury accident , RI personal injury lawyer, car accidents in Rhode island

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

East Providence, RI Personal Injury Law | David Slepkow, Attorney At Law

East Providence, RI Personal Injury Law | David Slepkow, Attorney At Law | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Personal Injury Law: Contact David Slepkow, Attorney At Law located in East Providence, RI today for more information about our Lawyer services. (401) 352-4969
David Slepkow's insight:

Please contact  East Providence, Rhode Island Personal Injury Lawyer, David Slepkow. We do everything in our power to help you get the best settlement possible to compensate you for your injuries.


As with all of our practice areas, a RI Personal Injury Attorney, not a paralegal, will guide you through the Rhode Island Personal Injury settlement process and a potential lawsuit. We offer contingent fee arrangements. There is no Fee unless we are successful in obtaining a legal settlement or judgment for you. We settle and aggressively litigate the following types of personal injury matters:


  • automobile (car / auto) accidents
  • motorcycle and truck accidents
  • dog bite injuries
  • slip and fall
  • insured motorists
  • uninsured motorists
  • accidental deaths
  • hit and run
  • property damage claims
  • pain and suffering
  • lost wages
  • bicycle accidents
  • whiplash injury
  • premises liability
  • serious injury
  • truck accidents
  • atv accidents
  • motor vehicle accident claims
  • pool accidents
  • underinsured motorist claims
  • serious injuries


Please email us with your personal injury questions and inquiries and a lawyer will respond as soon as possible. The email will go directly to one of the lawyers at our firm.


Evening Appointments available, home and hospital visits, limited weekend appointments available.


important keywords: RI personal injury accident , RI personal injury lawyer, car accidents in Rhode island

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

DUI with Accident: How it Impacts Auto Insurance

DUI with Accident: How it Impacts Auto Insurance | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
“Impaired Driving Accidents are multifaceted. They usually result in collateral damage that crosses over from criminal law to personal injury law, and have insurance implications.” According to the Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) there were a total of 1,282, 957 impaired or drunk driving arrests in 2012 throughout the…
David Slepkow's insight:
Insurance Company Actions Related to Impaired Driving

Unless specific exclusions apply most insurance policies provide coverage for an auto accident, even it related to impaired driving, as long as the vehicle or motor cycle you were driving was properly insured, and you carry coverage for property damage, liability and other losses to a victim that resulted from the impaired driving collision.

Auto insurance policies guidelines are regulated by the respective Department of Insurance where the policy was issued. In Arizona, it is the Arizona Department of Insurance or the person’s state in which they reside. Polices and their exclusions and limitations vary by insurer, policy type, and underwriting guidelines.

In general, most insurance companies do not contain exclusions for impaired driving related accidents while coverage is in force; they often take policy action upon the next renewal following the collision and claim. For example they may apply a surcharge, and increase the costs of the insurance; or they may even refuse to renew coverage.

If a person is looking for new auto coverage, an insurance company may deny coverage and refuse to issue an insurance policy, considering it too high of a risk to accept. The time limit to consider prior drunk driving conviction history may differ between insurance companies and be impacted by states laws.

Insurance Considerations – SR22 Filing

Most states have laws, which may differ with regard to impacts of auto insurance following an accident. In Arizona anyone with an impaired driving conviction must provide proof to the Arizona Motor Vehicle Department (MVD) of “SR22 Filing”. The SR22 is mandatory following a drug or alcohol driving conviction which calls for driver’s licenses suspensions or revocations. It serves as proof that you carry auto liability insurance through a licensed insurance carrier. There is a cost to the driver or policy holder for this, which varies by insurer and state.


A person convicted of impaired driving due to alcohol or drugs is required to carry the SR22 proof of insurance for at least three years following the conviction. If the driver cancels their auto liability coverage within that three year period, the insurance company is required by law to notify the Arizona Motor Vehicle Department upon cancellation of the SR22 insurance.

If the SR22 police lapses, or is terminated, the Motor Vehicle Department will immediately suspend, or revoke the motorist’s driver’s license; and the driver will need to go through the entire reinstatement and SR22 process again.


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Insurance Coverage

Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Insurance Coverage | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Uninsured Motorist and Underinsured Motorist Insurance Coverage is crucially important Insurance Coverage for all motorists. If someone is injured as a result of the negligence of an uninsured third party, the injured victim will receive no compensation as a result of the automobile wreck unless they have uninsured motorist coverage. In a UM or UIM…
David Slepkow's insight:

As a result of increased costs of medical care from injuries caused by car accidents as well as the potential devastating loss of wages, disability and pain and suffering, state minimums are usually not enough to compensate an injured victim for their damages.

It is generally not permitted to have more UM and UIM coverage then liability coverage. Most UM and UIM policies require arbitration to determine coverage.


If a motorist is injured in a hit and run motor vehicle or truck accident in which the other motorist is at fault for the crash, the reckless tortfeasor will be considered an uninsured motorist.

UM and UIM covers motorists in an accident with the following types of drivers:


  • Hit and run motorists
  • Motorists who have allowed their insurance to lapse for non-payment of premiums
  • uninsured motorists
  • Motorists without enough coverage to make the victim whole for their injuries


Rhode Island defines an underinsured motorist as “An “underinsured motorist” is the owner or operator of a motor vehicle who carries automobile liability insurance with coverage in an amount less than the limits or damages that persons insured pursuant to this section are legally entitled to recover because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease, including death, resulting from that injury, sickness or disease.” § 27-7-2.1 Uninsured motorist coverage.


Some states such as Rhode Island allow motorists to “stack” coverage. Many states do not allow stacking of policies. This can be a very confusing area of law that may involve multistate and conflict of law questions.


It is advisable that if you are involved in a car crash, you retain an experienced personal injury attorney.


In general, “stacking” means that an injured victim can receive compensation from a combination of insurance policies. In other words, if a negligent motorist with 25k policy rear ends a motorcyclist and the motorcyclist has 50k in medical bills as well as lost wages, traumatic brain injury and pain and suffering then the motorcycle operator through their motorcycle accident personal injury lawyer can collect the $25,000 policy in addition to his own $100,000 underinsurance policy for a total of $125,000.


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Insurance Legal obligations to act Fairly & Compensate Injured

Insurance Legal obligations to act Fairly & Compensate Injured | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Insurance Companies owe their Insured a contractual and common law duty of good faith and fair dealing, when they violate this they commit "bad faith"
David Slepkow's insight:

Occasionally, a top personal injury attorney will bring a bad faith case to trial and a jury punishes insurance for their coercive and manipulative tactics. Sometimes, the insurance company gets whacked for a multimillion dollar punitive damages judgment.

Sadly, insurance companies have created a pervasive culture of greed and arrogance in which adjusters quickly learn that their obligations are to the owners and stockholders of the insurance company and NOT to their insured. This culture puts corporate profit over providing proper coverage to their insured and properly compensating injured victims in motor vehicle accidents and premises liability claims.


Bad faith conduct in truck accidents, motorcycle accidents and motor vehicle  collision claims can take many shapes and forms. The most common types of bad faith are:


-Breaching the duty to defend an Insured against a claim, lawsuit or litigation. Unfortunately, an Indemnity company has the right to make the initial decision of whether they will provide their insured a negligence insurance Defense attorney to defend a claim for injuries or wrongful death as a result of a car accident, premises liability claim or other personal injury cause of action.


If a Liability Company violates the insurance contract and refuses to defend premises liability (slip and fall) or other negligence litigation by providing a competent accident attorney, the insured can bring their insurance company to court to seek justice in what is commonly known as “bad faith litigation.”


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Car Accident Victims Need Consent to Settle Before UIM Claim!

Car Accident Victims Need Consent to Settle Before UIM Claim! | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Auto Insurance Contracts require that a victim of a car crash obtain consent to settle with at fault party before pursuing underinsured motorist claim.
David Slepkow's insight:

The consent to settle provisions are a contractual obligation set forth in nearly all automobile, motorcycle and motor vehicle liability and indemnity insurance policies. Courts across the United States have determined that one of the primary rationales for the requirement is to protect the insurance company’s rights to subrogation.  In other words, an insured or their personal injury lawyer on their behalf must obtain consent to settle from their own insurance company in order to protect the insurance companies rights to subrogation.


The Connecticut Courts have stated, “One purpose of a consent to settle requirement is to protect the subrogation rights of the uninsured motorist insurer against the tortfeasor. Berts v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., 14 Conn. Law Rptr. No. 17, 523 (1995). – See more at: http://corporate.findlaw.com/corporate-governance/connecticut-uninsured-and-underinsured-motorist-coverage-issues.html#sthash.D8reFPgz.dpuf


What is the legal definition of subrogation?  Subrogation is a very complex concept for laypeople that do not have formal training in tort and personal injury law. To oversimplify the concept, subrogation is a fancy word for reimbursement.  It is when an insurance company pays the claim and reserves the right to file a lawsuit to go after the tortfeasor who negligently caused a bus, truck or motor vehicle accident.


According to Investopedia,Subrogation is the right for an insurer to pursue a third party that caused an insurance loss to the insured. This is done as a means of recovering the amount of the claim paid to the insured for the loss.”http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/subrogation.asp ***


According to Progressive Insurance, ““When your insurance company covers a loss that’s not your fault, they may pursue the at-fault party, which often is the other insurance company, to recover payments made for your damages and injuries. Insurance companies can only subrogate other parties if their customer is not at fault for an accident.” http://www.progressive.com/understanding-insurance/entries/2009/9/1/what_is_subrogation/


important keywords: Motorcycle Accident, Motorbike Accident Attorney, Cycle Accident Attorney

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Insurance Denials for Consumers who Purchased Insurance; 2 RI Cautionary Tales

Insurance Denials for Consumers who Purchased Insurance; 2 RI Cautionary Tales | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Everyone should check their insurance policies regularly to see whether their insurance coverage adequately protects them. 2 Cautionary Tales of denials.
David Slepkow's insight:

Key Facts: This was a motorcycle accident case in which a husband and wife were both seriously injured in a motorcycle and car collision. The motorcyclists’ injuries were caused by an uninsured automobile motorist. The Husband, later died as a result of the RI motorcycle crash. The deceased owned the motorcycle but the Bike was not listed on his insurance policy which had uninsured motorist coverage protection. The deceased’s uninsured motorist policy excluded coverage for any vehicles that were owned but not specifically insured in the policy. http://www.ripersonalinjurylaw.com/motorcycle-accident-insurance/

 

Decision of Rhode Island Supreme Court: The RI Supreme Court determined that the insurance policy was not ambiguous and that “Rhode Island’s uninsured motorist law, did not preclude an insurer’s ability to confine uninsured motorist coverage to those vehicles owned by an insured which are actually covered under the policy.” Id.

 

The Takeaway: Make sure that all motor vehicles, cars and motorcycles that you own are covered by applicable insurance policies that you have, including coverage for uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage.

 

 

PROVIDENCE MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. KEVIN NEARY; INEZ NEARY; PAMELA METRO, Individually and in : her capacity as Administratrix of the Estate of Luke R. Metro; and PAUL : METRO, Individually and as Father and Next of Kin to Luke Metro http://statecasefiles.justia.com/documents/rhode-island/superior-court/11-0236.pdf?ts=1344007402 , also see: http://www.jrapublish.com/no-insurance-coverage-for-baby-drowning-at-house-while-owner-is-babysitting-for-a-fee.html

 

Important facts: Homeowner was babysitting friend’s 18 month old child for a fee of $25 a day.  Homeowner had watched the child for many months charging a fee. Babysitter also regularly took care of three other minor children on the property. The toddler was left unattended momentarily and fell into a Koi pond on the property and drowned.

DECISION: RI Superior Court determined that there was no insurance coverage as a result of business exclusion in the homeowner’s insurance policy.


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

How do pre-existing medical conditions affect an auto accident claim?

How do pre-existing medical conditions affect an auto accident claim? | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Do pre-existing medical conditions ruin my chances of recovery in a personal injury car accident claim?
David Slepkow's insight:

Plaintiff [person claiming personal injury] is not entitled to damages for any physical or emotional condition that [he/she] had before defendant‘s conduct occurred. However, if plaintiff had a physical or emotional condition that was made worse by defendant‘s wrongful conduct, you must award damages that will reasonably and fairly compensate [him/her] for the effect on that condition.” California Civil Jury Instruction 3927


Proving exacerbation requires a medical opinion and oftentimes diagnostic studies like X-rays or MRIs, which can be compared to the medical records and films that were taken during the diagnosis and treatment that occurred at the time of the prior injury.

The “Egg Shell Plaintiff Rule”:


A related principle that is followed in most, if not all, U.S. states is known as the “egg shell plaintiff rule”.  Like the old proverb about Humpty-Dumpty and his great fall, the law states that if you injure someone who is more prone to injury than the average person, the at fault party is still responsible for all of the bodily harm caused by the incident.  Stated another way, the negligent party is responsible, “for all damages caused by the wrongful conduct … even if plaintiff was more susceptible to injury than a normally healthy person would have been, and even if a normally healthy person would not have suffered similar injury.” California Civil Jury Instruction 3928

Conclusion:


If you are presently in a dispute with an auto insurance carrier about whether or not their insured is liable for your injury due to a prior medical condition, it is best to consult with an attorney familiar with these issues and have that lawyer review your medical records and discuss these issues with your treating physicians.  In fact, it is best to immediately, consult with a personal injury lawyer prior to engaging in discussions with insurance claims adjusters and other representatives at all.  Oftentimes, claims personnel will attempt to find out your entire medical history and obtain medical release authorizations to do so if you are not represented by a lawyer.  Only injuries to a same or similar body part are relevant and your medical history should be guarded accordingly.  Obtaining the help and assistance of an experience accident attorney can make all the difference in these cases!


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Rhode Island Bicycle Accident Lawyer

RI Bike Crash Attorney. Personal Injury Attorneys in Rhode Island
David Slepkow's insight:

You may have also sustained some injuries that were similar to what you might experience during a car accident. Think about some of the different challenges you may face in the courtroom as a consequence of this. You will want to speak to Rhode Island personal Injury Attorney, who can help guide you through any challenges that you may be facing.


The first and most important step will be to seek out medical help as soon as possible if you are feeling any pain. You need to obtain a RI bike crash attorney in RI as soon as possible. It is crucial that you to talk to an experienced and knowledgeable legal professional. Make sure you seek medical care from medical professionals to figure out the extent of your injuries. Your Providence Bicycle Accident Lawyer can help you identify some of the different types of compensation you may be eligible to receive.


Your negligence attorney, will likely ask you very specific questions about the nature of the bicycle crash. It will be important to recall the details as accurately as possible. It is especially important to try to work with an attorney who can help walk you through what some of these details mean. You may want to request copies of the police report and any medical records that were generated as a result of this accident. These can help the attorney figure out what steps you should take to file a suit. They may be able to determine the likelihood of prevailing in bicycle accident litigation  in the Rhode Island court system.


You should also pay careful attention to the types of medical bills or pain you may be feeling as a result of the case. The lawyer may be able to refer you to a specialist that can help examine you for further injury. They will report back to the lawyers with any findings that they may have.


important keywords: RI Slip and Fall accident, RI personal injury lawyer, Car Accidents Lawyer

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Arizona Personal Injury Accident Law - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

Avondale | Bullhead City | Chandler | Gilbert | Glendale | Kingman | Mesa |Parker | Phoenix | Scottsdale | Tempe  | Tucson | Winslow | Yuma Arizona  (AZ) Court Decisions concerning slip and fall and premises liability: 152 Ariz. 398 (1987)733 P.2d 283 Nancy P. CHIARA and Richard A. Chiara, wife and husband, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FRY’S FOOD STORES OF ARIZONA, INC., a California corporation; and Fry’s Food Stores, Inc., a California corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. CV-86-0047-PR.Supreme Court of Arizona, En …
David Slepkow's insight:

Courts in Arizona and in other jurisdictions have mitigated this seeming inequity by developing the “mode-of-operation” rule. The “mode-of-operation” rule looks to a business’s choice of a particular mode of operation and not events surrounding the plaintiff’s accident. Under the rule, the plaintiff is not required to prove notice if the proprietor could reasonably anticipate that hazardous conditions would regularly arise. See Bloom v. Fry’s Food Stores, 130 Ariz. 447, 636 P.2d 1229 (App. 1981);Tom v. S.S. Kresge Co., 130 Ariz. 30, 633 P.2d 439 (App. 1981). In other words, a third person’s independent negligence is no longer the source of liability, and the plaintiff is freed from the burden of discovering and proving a third person’s actions. A plaintiff’s proof of a particular mode-of-operation simply substitutes for the traditional elements of a prima facie case — the existence of a dangerous condition and notice of a dangerous condition. This is neither a new nor radical principle. We have recognized, in other contexts, a businessman’s duty to anticipate the hazardous acts of others likely to occur on his property, e.g., Chernov v. St. Luke’s Hospital Medical Center, 123 Ariz. 521, 522-23, 601 P.2d 284, 285-86 (1979)(hospital not entitled to summary judgment when plaintiff alleged that accident in hospital parking lot was produced by hospital’s improper maintenance of traffic control signals); see also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 344 (“A possessor of land who holds it open to the public for entry for his business purposes is subject to liability to members of the public while they are upon the land for such a purpose, for physical harm caused by the accidental, negligent, or intentionally harmful acts of third persons …, and by the failure of the possessor to exercise reasonable care to [protect the public]“).

The mode-of-operation rule is of limited application because nearly every business enterprise produces some risk of customer 401*401 interference. If the mode-of-operation rule applied whenever customer interference was conceivable, the rule would engulf the remainder of negligence law. A plaintiff could get to the jury in most cases simply by presenting proof that a store’s customer could have conceivably produced the hazardous condition.

important keywords: RI Slip and Fall accident, RI personal injury lawyer, Car Accidents Lawyer

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Albuquerque New Mexico Slip and fall Premises Liability Law - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

33 P.3d 32 (2001) 131 N.M. 32 2001-NMCA-068 Cloyd ENNIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KMART CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. No. 20,977. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. June 21, 2001. Certiorari Denied September 6, 2001. June 21, 2001. Certiorari Denied September 6, 2001. Excerpt from the New Mexico Slip and Fall decision from The Court of Appeals of New …
David Slepkow's insight:

here have been relatively few “slip-and-fall” cases in New Mexico. These are Barakos v. Sponduris, 64 N.M. 125, 325 P.2d 712; Kitts v. Shop Rite Foods, Inc., 64 N.M. 24, 323 P.2d 282; Barrans v. Hogan, 62 N.M. 79, 304 P.2d 880; and De Baca v. Kahn, 49 N.M. 225, 161 P.2d 630. In addition to these true “slip-and-fall” cases, there have been several other cases involving the duty of a business proprietor to his invitees. The most recent of these latter cases is Gonzales v. Shoprite Foods, Inc., 69 N.M. 95, 364 P.2d 352. The Gonzales case involved injuries sustained by a customer when a small box of dry starch fell from its stack in a self-service store, striking a bottle of liquid starch and causing the latter to crash onto her foot. In the Gonzales case we stated the rule as follows: “`This court has taken the position that the proprietor of a place of business to which any and all members of the public are invited is not a guarantor of the safety of those who enter such place of business. It is the established holding in this court that, in order to render the proprietor of a place of business liable in damages to another for injuries sustained in that place of business, he must be guilty of negligence; and that such negligence must consist of the maintenance of a dangerous condition in or about the place of business and of knowledge on the part of the proprietor of the existence of the dangerous condition, or there must be evidence giving rise to inferences which charge the proprietor with knowledge.’
* * * * * *


“* * * we have said that what constitutes due care of an inviter is always to be determined by the circumstances and conditions surrounding the transaction under consideration. De Baca v. Kahn, supra. * *”


De Baca v. Kahn, supra, is one of the earliest “slip-and-fall” cases in this jurisdiction, with the possible exception of Snodgrass v. Turner Tourist Hotels, 45 N.M. 50, 109 P.2d 775, which involved a change in level accompanied by poor lighting, rather than the presence of a slippery spot or a foreign substance on the floor or stairs. Similar cases are Seal v. Safeway Stores, 48 N.M. 200, 147 P.2d 359, and Dominguez v. Southwestern Greyhound Lines, 49 N.M. 13, 155 P.2d 138.


important keywords: premises liability and slip and fall claims, Construction accidents

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Alabama Premises Liability Law - RI Premises Liability & Slip and Fall Center

Albertville | Andalusia | Anniston | Arab | Auburn | Birmingham | Brewton |Centre | Childersburg | Clanton | Cullman | Decatur | Dothan | Enterprise |Evergreen | Florence | Foley | Fort Payne | Gadsen | Heflin | Huntsville | Jackson| Jasper | Mobile | Montgomery | Monroeville | Ozark | Pelham | Pell City |Phenix City | Prattville | Roanoke | Selma | Sylacauga | Talladega | Troy |Tuscaloosa | Tuscumbia | Tuskegee 109 So.3d 170 (2012) Ex parte ADVANTAGE RESOURCING, INC. (In re Hennon Hollinghead v. Willstaff, Inc., et al.). 2100716.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.April 20, 2012  “Unlike the injured employee at issue in Ex parte Patton, however, the employee in this case did not simply allege and prove that he had …
David Slepkow's insight:

Unlike the injured employee at issue in Ex parte Patton, however, the employee in this case did not simply allege and prove that he had suffered a fall on an employer’s premises. Rather, the evidence in this case, viewed in a light most favorable to the employee, indicates that the employee, at the time that he fell on the PVC pipe, was in the process of returning to the shop, i.e., the place where the employee reported at the start of each of his workdays, after having gone to his automobile to retrieve a two-way radio, which no party disputes was a tool of the employee’s work. The walkway that the employee used was used by other RDA workers at the time that the employee suffered his fall and subsequent injury, notwithstanding the fact that that path was marked as being impassable after the employee’s fall. That the fall in this case stemmed from a PVC pipe that had been allowed to remain in close proximity to a walkway leading to a shop at which the employee and his coworkers were to report for work each day and that the employee’s fall occurred at a time and place at which he would reasonably be expected to have reported in furtherance of the employment relationship both support the trial court’s determination that the employee’s fall indeed arose out of and in the course of his employment. See Ex parte Strickland, 553 So.2d 593, 595 (Ala.1989) (holding that employee’s injury, which had occurred after he had jumped from a fence enclosing his employer’s company parking lot after having retrieved personal items and a work tool belt from the lot, was “`naturally related’ to his employment” for purposes of legal causation under the Act; employee was covered for a reasonable time, space, and opportunity before and after he was at or near his place of employment); see also Benoit Coal Mining Co. v. Moore, 215 Ala. 220, 222-23, 109 So. 878, 880 (1926) (“`the movement of the employee in entering, at the appropriate time, the employer’s premises to discharge his function [and] his preparation to begin … his actual service’” are deemed “`naturally related and incidental acts in the course of the employment’” (quoting Ex parte Louisville & Nashville R.R., 208 Ala. 216, 219, 94 So. 289, 292 (1922))).”


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10465126509689257340&q=slip+fall+accident&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2010


important keywords: premises liability and slip and fall claims, Construction accidents

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

David Slepkow, Attorney At Law Services | Lawyer East Providence, RI

For more information about our Lawyer services, please contact David Slepkow, Attorney At Law in East Providence, RI today. (401) 352-4969
David Slepkow's insight:

If you're looking for excellent service and a people-friendly approach, then you've come to the right place. At David Slepkow, Attorney At Law, our ultimate goal is to serve you and make your experience a pleasant one, and our team will stop at nothing to ensure that you come away more than satisfied.


important keywords: RI personal injury accident , RI personal injury lawyer, car accidents in Rhode island

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

East Providence, RI Auto Accident Law | David Slepkow, Attorney At Law

East Providence, RI Auto Accident Law | David Slepkow, Attorney At Law | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Auto Accident Law: Contact David Slepkow, Attorney At Law located in East Providence, RI today for more information about our Lawyer services. (401) 352-4969
David Slepkow's insight:

Being involved in an auto accident is a frightening experience that can drastically change your life within seconds.  A car accident can cause debilitating physical injuries, emotional trauma, and costly property damage. And a serious car accident injury that prevents you from returning to your job (or that limits the number of hours you can work) can be financially devastating. Even an accident that occurs at a low speed, or that doesn’t result in much damage to your car, can cause physical injuries.

If you’ve been involved in a car accident, it’s important to take steps to protect your legal rights, before it’s too late. If you’ve recently been hurt in a motor vehicle accident, we can help you by:


  • Investigating your accident to compile evidence
  • Negotiating on your behalf with the other driver’s insurance company (if the other driver is uninsured, we can help you file for uninsured motorist benefits under your own insurance policy)
  • Filing and pursuing a lawsuit on your behalf if negotiations don’t lead to a successful settlement


An auto accident lawyer from our firm can help you find peace of mind after your accident so that you can move forward with your life. Contact us to set up a consultation with a lawyer from our office.


important keywords: Fatal Vehicle Accident, Car Accident Attorney, Truck Accident Attorney

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Commercial Insurance: CRUCIAL for non-auto owners with company car to have "drive other car" coverage

Commercial Insurance: CRUCIAL for non-auto owners with company car to have "drive other car" coverage | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
“Drive other cars” (DOC) commercial coverage may be important for most business owners, employees or partners who have a motor vehicle owned in a corporate capacity. “Drive other cars” coverage is absolutely essential for anyone who has a car owned by a corporation, Limited Liability Company LLC or business entity, when the person does not…
David Slepkow's insight:

He has peace of mind because his company provides him “full coverage” with 1 million dollar liability in the event of motor vehicle accident, collision coverage as well as underinsured and uninsured motorist coverage amounting to 1 million! Paul also uses the car for personal use. As a result Paul does not own another vehicle.

Paul is out with his buddy Jim using Jim’s pick-up truck. Jim was drunk and as a result, Paul graciously offers to drive his car home. On the way home, a semi-truck (tractor trailer) slams into the pickup truck he was driving in a rear end crash. This caused Paul to have several fractured disks, a broken leg and traumatic brain injury. He is totally disabled for year and he has several surgeries.


Sadly the semi-truck OWNER let his insurance LAPSE FOR NONPAYMENT. His buddy Jim only has $25,000 of uninsured motorist coverage which is the minimum required by the state. Paul is only able to collect the 25k uninsured motorist policy. He is unable to get the 1 million dollar underinsured coverage in his commercial policy.

Paul never looked into the terms of his commercial policy to insure that he was covered for truck and motor vehicle collisions when he drove other cars. Paul did not have the drive other car coverage. He is forced to live for the rest of his life on social security disability of $1,800 a month and live in subsidized housing as a result of the trucking accident. He also cannot afford a home nurse to care for him. His house is also foreclosed on him and he declares bankruptcy.


Paul receives no uninsured motorist coverage because he failed to request from his company a drive other car endorsement.

According to Clark Mortenson, “Drive other car coverage provides liability, medical payments, uninsured/underinsured motorist, and physical damage coverage for the personal use of a non-owned automobile by the individual you wish to protect. If an individual, for example, a company officer, does not have their own personal auto policy, and drives a corporate car, you would want to add this coverage to protect them from exposures such as borrowing a neighbor’s vehicle, or renting a car on vacation with their family. If your business is a sole proprietorship, you should have the Individual Named Insured endorsement attached to your business auto policy to provide you with the same coverage.” http://www.clarkmortenson.com/for-your-business/insurance-bonds/business-auto-insurance/drive-other-car.


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

What Is The Minimum Liability Auto Insurance Coverage in Your State And Why Should You Carry More If Possible?

What Is The Minimum Liability Auto Insurance Coverage in Your State And Why Should You Carry More If Possible? | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
In every state in the U.S. from California to Rhode Island, every driver of a motor vehicle is required to carry a minimum amount of auto insurance coverage for liability for personal injury or property damage. Coverage is stated in terms of the limits for claims for personal injury presented by a single claimant, limits…
David Slepkow's insight:

While many people choose to just purchase the minimum, required insurance for their automobile, it is always advisable to carry as much auto insurance coverage as possible. Oftentimes, if a person has any type of significant injury such as a fracture, slipped disc or any other bodily harm requiring costs for things like surgery or extensive therapy, their claim will far exceed these minimum limits? What happens in that scenario? If the person is represented by a personal injury lawyer, that lawyer will run an “asset check” on the at fault party. If the check reveals any type of asset such as a home or other property, vehicles, liquid assets such as money in the bank, or anything with any significant value that could be attached to pay a judgment in excess of insurance, you may not be able to get released from the claim by just turning it over to insurance. A lawyer may ask that the “insured” make some, personal contribution above and beyond the auto insurance policy limit as a condition of settlement of claims.


For these reasons, it is always suggested that you carry as high of a policy limit for single and multiple claims (and property damage for that matter). Obviously, higher limits require higher premiums but, this additional coverage could mean the difference between being able to satisfy claims without coming “out of pocket” or even prevent something as drastic as a personal bankruptcy. Many auto insurance carriers also write homeowners policies, motorcycle, boat, RV and other types of policies and offer discounts for “bundling” coverage. Many of these insurance companies also offer “umbrella” or “excess” coverage which can provide additional limits (usually up to a million dollars or more) for very little additional premiums (sometimes as little as a few hundred dollars a year) if you take out more than “minimum coverage”. For example, many carriers in California offer such excess coverage if a person carries a minimum of $250,000/$500,000.


You can’t put a price on “peace of mind”. Review what your state requires at a minimum above and make sure you at least have this coverage so that you do not violate financial responsibility laws that can jeopardize your license but, try to always carry higher limits of coverage and umbrella coverage if possible. It can make a big difference if and when a claim or multiple claims are filed against you after a traffic collision!


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Motorcycle Insurance: Types of Coverage Explained

Motorcycle Insurance: Types of Coverage Explained | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
The spring and summer months bring out the motorcycle enthusiasts “in earnest”. Riding a bike on the open road can be one of the most exhilarating experiences one can enjoy. As with any other type of activity, though, motorcycle riding is not without risk. In fact, according to statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety…
David Slepkow's insight:
Attorney Suggestions For Motorcycle Accident Insurance:

As a lawyer that has represented a lot of bikers involved in motorcycle accidents over the past two decades, I can tell you that motorcycle accidents tend to result in much more serious injuries than passenger vehicle collisions. Let’s face it, if you get hit on a bike, there is nothing to protect you other than your helmet and other safety gear. Serious bodily harm like fractures, internal injuries, head trauma and spine injury are not uncommon. Sometimes this equates to a few hundred in bills in minor cases, but, significant injuries like traumatic brain injury or paralysis can and do occur with much more frequency in motorcycle collision claims. For this reason, I always suggest that every biker insure themselves for personal injury including uninsured motorist coverage, medical payments and comprehensive and collision coverage for the motorcycle. If you have a custom bike, make sure to disclose this at the time of purchase as failure to do so can result in a denial of repair costs. If guest passenger liability is an additional coverage not included in the bodily injury liability plan, you absolutely should purchase this if you ever intend to carry passengers on your bike. Passenger injuries can be just as severe and costly and, without this insurance, you could be stuck with thousands or even hundreds of thousands in liability. Medical payments or “med pay” is good to have for more minor accidents that cause medical bills that are high enough to meet health insurance annual deductible thresholds. Uninsured (“UM”) and Underinsured (“UIM”) coverage is a must have. There are literally thousands of people driving around with either no insurance or the state minimum required. Roadside assistance is a nice “add on” but, probably not necessary if you have coverage through AAA or through your motorcycle manufacturer.


important keywords: Fatal Vehicle Accident, Car Accident Attorney, Truck Accident Attorney

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Insurance that ONLY covers events that already happened: Title Insurance

Insurance that ONLY covers events that already happened: Title Insurance | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Title Insurance Coverage is the only insurance available that covers events that already occurred. It does not cover anything that occurs in the future.
David Slepkow's insight:

For example, title insurance would provide coverage if there was a deed in the chain of title which was obtained at gunpoint and by force. If the person comes forward years later, perhaps because they escaped a kidnapper, they could claim that the deed was void because it was obtained by force and that they still owned the property. This is despite the fact that you paid 600,000 for it and have lived there for several years with your family and children.  If a court rules the other person was the rightful owner, then you would lose your entire investment without any compensation! That would be a bitter pill to swallow.


Title insurance insures the record title and protects an owner of property from certain losses arising from defects occurring prior to the date of the title insurance policy. It is very different from other types of insurance such as motor vehicle Insurance or homeowner’s insurance because it is retrospective. It also differs from other types of insurance such as motorcycle insurance and renters insurance because there is only a single premium charge, but the protection lasts for as long as you own the real estate.


There are different types of title insurance policies which protect both owners and lenders. Lender’s title insurance performs the same purpose. However, only a lender can legally obtain a lenders’ title policy. A Lender’s title policy is mandatory and a buyer is strongly advised to obtain an owner’s policy.


A house is sometimes the most important investment a person will make in their lifetime. It is crucial that homeowner’s protect their investment and purchase title insurance.


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Liability for Victims of Cruel Punishment or Police Brutality & Wrongful Death

Liability for Victims of Cruel Punishment or Police Brutality & Wrongful Death | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
Some states, & Cities have special insurance that strictly covers police officers in the line of duty. Some of the larger cities are self-insured,.
David Slepkow's insight:

Generally in the case of wrongful death during arrest or detention it is the County or other jurisdiction that is sued. Maricopa County (MCSO) has paid out more than $25 million in settlements or awards for wrongful deaths over the last 20 years while a suspects or inmates were detained or incarcerated in Jail.


In most cases the County is sued, and the settlements are paid by taxpayer dollars. Some Counties have Excess Insurance that pay a portion of the defense costs and awards.


Maricopa County is the 4th largest County in the United States.   It is common for large populous jurisdiction to carry high maximum insurance policies and as well as budgeting annually for what is known as a Self-Insured Risk fund. That amount is generally about $5 million, on hand.


The MCSO like many counties with similar risk exposures also carry coverages known as reinsurance or in-excess policies. In these cases, the county pays a portion of the loss to a certain threshold. At the threshold point, the excess or reinsurance would begin to provide coverage to a declared maximum.


In Maricopa County it the cost of insurance premiums has increased due its litigious exposures and claim experience. A recent report by the Arizona Central local media outlet that the MCSO pays over $2 Million annually for the sum of coverages from 6 different insurance policies, to provide $55 Million in coverage for defense costs and settlements to cover a wide range of high risk exposures including lawsuits for assaults or wrongful deaths that occur during detention.


important keywords: Wrongful Death Accidents, Wrongful Death, Wrongful Accidents

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by David Slepkow
Scoop.it!

Shameful Geico ‘Lawyers up’ Rather than Paying 25K to Grieving Father for Death

Shameful Geico ‘Lawyers up’ Rather than Paying 25K to Grieving Father for Death | RI Motorcycle Accident | Scoop.it
MEMO TO GEICO and their empty suit insurance defense personal injury lawyers: PAY THE MEASLY 25K UNCONDITIONALLY AND WITHOUT RESERVING RIGHTS AND GET LOST!
David Slepkow's insight:

In the case of RICHARD A. FOOTE, V. GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY a young man was tragically killed in a Rhode Island car accident when a reckless driver ran a red light and killed him. Sadly the man who died only had $25,000 of underinsured motorist protection. The negligent, at fault driver had a $100,000 liability policy. The man’s underinsured motorist carrier, Geico, refused to unconditionally pony up the paltry sum of $25000. (they also wanted a setoff of $2500 for med pay payments)


“In May 2010, Colin Foote died as a result of injuries sustained when a car struck his motorcycle.” Id.  The tortfeasor, Laura Reale, subsequently pled guilty to a felony charge of driving to endanger with death resulting.” Id.  The tortfeasor had an automobile liability policy with $1000,000 of liability coverage.


The grieving father of the decedent asserted that the negligent and reckless motorist who killed his son in the RI auto crash did not have enough insurance to properly compensate the family for their family’s loss! Id.


The family of the man killed in the fatal RI accident pursued a wrongful death underinsured motorist claim pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 27-7-2.1(g) against the decedant’s own underinsured motorist insurance carrier. “The Policy also provides uninsured/underinsured motorist (―UM‖) coverage of $25,000 limit per person and $50,000 per occurrence.” Id. http://www.ripersonalinjurylaw.com/key-provisions-ri-wrongful-death-law/ 


Geico offered to pay the $25,000 to the grieving family with numerous stipulations which effectively gutted the offer and made it relatively meaningless. Geico was seeking reimbursement (subrogation) of its 25k payment in the event of a settlement or judgment against the tortfeasor.  According to the plaintiff,  GEICO was requesting “ to receive the first $25,000 of any recovery, assigns all rights to GEICO, requires all monies recovered to be paid directly to GEICO, and further deducts GEICO litigation expenses.” Id.

To add insult to injury, Geico was demanding a setoff of its $2500 med pay payment. In other words, Geico wanted to pay $22,500 rather than the measly $25,000!


important keywords: Insurance Policy Attorney, Insurance Policy Lawyer,Insurance Claim Lawyer, Personal Injury Claim

more...
No comment yet.