Paramount Insurance is a MAIF type insurance company in every way that matters to a Maryland accident lawyer. Honestly, it might be worse.
Paramount Insurance is a MAIF type insurance company in every way that matters to a Maryland accident lawyer. Honestly, it might be worse.
Defendants in car accident cases frequently look to pass the buck of responsibility, usually claiming the injury victim caused or contributed to the car accident. In some cases, the facts are such that the idea of such an allegation would fall flat before it even began. In these cases, when the facts allow, defendants will often place blame on the culprit that cannot defend themselves: the phantom car or truck.
These claims vary from “I could see that” to “that’s impossible.” Either way, smart Maryland accident lawyers do one of two things when this happens: place the uninsured motorist carrier on notice of the potential uninsured motorist claim (it can intervene if it wants) or file an amended complaint pointing alternatively to the phantom car.
Personally, I find it a little odd when car accident victims swear at the at-fault driver after an accident. I know people cause car accidents and I don’t have great expectations of those strangers.
But that is a minority view. The f-bomb is de jure at car accident scenes in Maryland (and, road rage statistics tell us, probably in every town from here to Tripoli).
I do not know if it is a trend or whether I’m just noticing it more often. But I think our firm is seeing more cases than ever where the medical expert designated by the defendant is not the appropriate expert. Instead of matching the expert to the facts, they seem to just designate the usual suspects regardless of what the case is really about – trotting out shoulder guys in knee cases, orthopedic doctors in neurology cases, etc.
Here are two good questions to ask in these cases:
Let me begin this post with a disclaimer. I am a Maryland accident lawyer who handles serious injury cases only. My law firm does not handle property damage or minor injury claims. But, without a doubt, property damage claims are vexing for the vast majority of people who are involved in a car accident. So let me give you my thoughts on property damage cases. You can also find more information along with my law firm’s thoughts on property damage claims on our website.
It is easy to forget from where I am sitting, but the average auto accident claim does not involve injuries. Without an injury, it is hard, (read: virtually) impossible to get a lawyer to handle your claim. So most property damage accident victims will end up handling their own property damage claims rather than getting the assistance of an attorney. Without an attorney, consumers are behind the 8 ball if the insurance company does not play it straight and tries to take advantage of the fact that the claimant does not understand the law and their rights when making a property damage claim from a car accident.
Metro Verdicts Monthly this month provides a graph on its cover showing the median verdicts and settlements in motor vehicle accident death cases. In Maryland, the median is $457,152; Virginia’s death case median is $487,500.
Why so low? While a death case in a truck accident case is probably three times this number, many auto and motorcycle accident claims have smaller insurance policies. We have handled death cases in car and motorcycle accidents where the victim’s family walks away with $20,000 or $50,000 in a wrongful death/survival action case because the insurance is limited and the at-fault driver does not have significant assets. These settlements are included in the data which drags down the median number.
It bears repeating that sometimes the most significant battle for plaintiffs’ attorneys in wrongful death car accident claims in Maryland is not at trial but before trial when they are digging through insurance policies trying to find coverage for the death.
Maryland’s new DWCP (Driving While on Cell Phone) law starts tomorrow. Here are the details:
1. What is Maryland’s Cell Phone Law?
The new Maryland law will prohibit all Maryland drivers from using a cell phone without a hands free device while operating a motor vehicle in motion on a street or highway. So, apparently, you can still get in a quick chat at red lights.
Everyone hates people who text while driving. Everyone. Even, notably, those who text while driving themselves. In response, we have passed a lot of laws to ban texting while driving.
How are they working? The early returns are not good. The recent report by the Highway Loss Data Institute listed car accident data in four states – California, Louisiana, Minnesota, and Washington – that have banned texting while driving and found that there was no decrease in the accident rate. The study further found that instead of a decrease in texting-related car accidents, “there appears to have been a small increase in claims in the states enacting texting bans” suggesting “that texting drivers have responded to the law . . . by hiding their phones from view.”
Who funded the study? The report is by the Highway Loss Data Institute, an insurance industry-funded research group that opposes laws banning text messages for reasons that escape me as I write this post. I don’t think they have a lot of credibility. But, look, I don’t disagree with the premise. The law is new and public awareness as to the scope of the distracted driver problems (over 5,000 deaths a year in this country) has not waded its way into the public consciousness beyond the reflex of hating everyone who texts and drives except yourself. But over time, anti-texting laws will be an important weapon to underscoring the risk of texting and driving. The other big weapon, sadly, will be continued reports and understanding of the bloodshed that results from people texting while driving.
Baltimore drivers are among the worst in the country, according to the Baltimore Business Journal.
The Baltimore Business Journal’s source is Allstate, which would normally make me, ah, question the source. But Allstate has no real motivation to spin this (besides justifying the obscene car insurance prices they charge in Baltimore).
Allstate ranked 200 of America’s largest cities using car accident statistics. Baltimore drivers are in an accident an average of every 5.6 years. Of course, the vast majority of these accidents are property damage only accidents that are relatively minor.
In Prince George’s County v. Brent, the Maryland Court of Appeals answers the question that will probably never be asked again: can you sue the agent after a successful case against the master? (Sneak preview: the answer is yes.)
The case involves an accident at the Branch Avenue (Route 5) and Allentown Road (Route 337) interchange in Prince George’s County against a police officer. Of course, when the Local Government Torts Claims Act is involved, plaintiffs’ accident lawyers have to navigate through more hurdles than Bristol Palin’s path to happiness. (Did you hear she is engaged? To Levi? Really, it’s true! I read it in US Weekly.)
So, bizarrely, the Plaintiff tried the case against PG County alone and got a $230,000 verdict. But the verdict was reduced by the procedural hodgepodge of Maryland Code §5-524 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article that limits the sovereign immunity waiver to the available insurance coverage in car accident cases. So Plaintiff goes back and gets a verdict against the police officer, trying the case solely on the issue of whether the police officer was responding to an emergency.