Birmingham Personal Injury Lawyer - Car accidents

Alabama Uninsured Motorist Coverage - Unbelievable!!

Jon Lewis — Thu, 28 May 2009 08:12:00 GMT

Here is a little example of Alabama law which would probably irritate most people if they found themselves in the same situation. It involves a case decided by the Supreme Court of Alabama on May 15, 2009: Kendall v. United Services Automobile Association. The Supreme Court of Alabama ruled according to the law and found in favor of United Services Automobile Association (USAA Insurance).

In Kendall, an employee of Elmore County ran a red light and collided with Mrs. Kendall. Mrs. Kendall had substantial injuries and damages. In fact, her medical expenses exceeded $100,000. Mrs. Kendall made a claim against Elmore County and settled for the $100,000 cap which one may recover from a county in Alabama. She then proceeded to make a claim on her uninsured motorist portion of her insurance policy with USAA.

Uninsured motorist coverage protects you if the defendant does not have enough insurance or has no insurance. This was the case in Kendall because the $100,000 available from Elmore County was not enough to cover Mrs. Kendall's damages. However, the law says you must be "legally entitled to recover" from the defendant in order to recover on your uninsured motorist portion of your insurance policy. Since counties are capped at $100,000, you are not "legally entitled to recover" more than $100,000 from a county. Consequently, you cannot recover any of your uninsured motorist coverage on your insurance policy - which is what the Supreme Court said.

Does this make sense? You are paying premiums every month for uninsured/underinsured motorist protection, and yet, the insurance company is protected if the defendant is protected. This is also true if you run into a deer or a State vehicle. There are other situations as well. Does your insurance agent explain this to you? Of course not. It seems ridiculous, but it's true.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Dangerous Driving Habits That Can Result in Bicycle Accidents

Danny Feldman — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:01:56 GMT

Anyone who has done much cycling will recognize the behaviors described below. Over the next few weeks, I plan to blog in more detail about these behaviors that drivers engage in, sometimes deliberately, sometime not, but to the effect of putting cyclicts in danger of, very often, serious injury. Not to be one-sided, I then plan to blog on a series of dangerous/annoying cyclist's behaviors that have the effect of putting the cyclist in dangerous situations, and serve to annoy drivers. Motorist's behaviors that are annoying/dangerous include the following:

1. Buzzing - driving too close to a cyclist, often within mere inches at very high speed. This behavior typically is deliberate;

2. Right Hook - driver and cyclist traveling in same direction and driver passes and makes a right hand turn directly in front of the cyclist;

3. Turning or Pulling Out Too Close to Cyclist - Driver pulls out from stop sign or light when cyclist has the right of way or driver and cyclist traveling in opposite direction and driver makes a left turn directly in front of cyclist. Although these behaviors are often deliberate, many times motorsists do not realize how fast a bicycle is traveling, thus excerbating the problem;

4. Following too Close - this behavior often happens when a cyclist is traveling downhill at a fairly high speed of 30 - 40 mph and motorist follows behind a mere few feet away;

5. Harrassment - throwing stuff at cyclist; screaming at cyclist; swerving car toward cyclist etc. - always deliebarate; and,

6. Distracted Driver - typically involves driver talking or texting on a cell phone.

In my next series of blogs, I'll describe these behaviors in more detail and give examples of some of the negative outcomes of these behaviors, as well as provide a few thoughts on what can be done to address same.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danny Feldman

Disc Jockey Bike Accident Comments Anger Birmingham Residents

Danny Feldman — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:59:00 GMT

Recently there was a bit of an uproar over commenets made by two disc jockeys in the Birmingham, Alabama area. These comments, which basically suggested that it "would be funny" for motorists to run cyclists off the road or "send them flying over the handlebars" generated quite an uproar in the Birmingham cycling community. The post below was sent out by the President of the Birmingham Bicycle Club:

BBC members and Birmingham Cycling Community:

As most of you are well aware, there were some regrettable comments made by talk show hosts on WJOX last Thursday (3/19/09) regarding, and according to some accounts advocating, violence toward cyclists. While I personally did not hear the show, there is little doubt that the hosts exhibited very poor judgment, at best. As president of BBC, I have filed a complaint with the FCC regarding this incident.

In response to a barrage of email and telephone comments from outraged cyclists and listeners, the station has since made 4 on-the-air apologies. They are airing a public service discussion on cycling safety today at 11:00 am. BBC member and attorney Danny Feldman will be a guest on the show Friday. See below for details.

Based on the communications I have been involved in, I believe that the cycling community has made its thoughts known. I do not feel that more emails on this matter would necessarily be productive. However, should you choose to communicate with WJOX, or to otherwise air your opinion on this issue, please remember that your comments reflect all of us. While it is inexcusable that a talk show host advocate unlawful violence against anyone, confrontational communications are not productive. We have seen cyclist versus motorist issues flare up in the past and get out of control. Nobody wins. Please choose your words carefully.

Sincerely,

Barbara

I was given the opportunity to be on the radio last Friday March 27 and spoke for about 10 minutes on the serious consequences cyclists face when they are struck by motorized vehicles. You can listen to the interview by going to our website at www.LFLMlaw.com.

Both disc jockeys (off the air when we talked briefly before and after the interview) stated that they had prefaced their original comments with words to the effect of "assuming the cyclist did not get hurt." Whether this is true or not, I do not know as I have not heard the original comments. That being said, both of these guys readily admitted, both on and off air that their comments were inappropriate, uneducated and ignorant and that they were sorry for making them. The radio station (WJOX) also purchased PSA (public service announcements regarding "sharing the road") and spent some money sponsoring some upcoming local cycling events. In short, I believe that the local cycling communities' vocal and immediate outcry and the station's reaction to same turned a negative incident into a positive one.

Over the next few weeks, I will blog about some particularly dangerous motorist behavior as it relates to bicycle versus motor vehicle incidents. Then I will turn to irresponsible and careless cycling behavior that also contributes to bicycle versus motor vehicle wrecks and accidents.

Danny

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Danny Feldman

What Causes Car Accidents?

Jon Lewis — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 11:58:29 GMT

A Birmingham News article in today's paper referenced a talk given by John Staddon, Ph.D., a psychology professor at Duke University. The talk was given at an advisory board meeting of the UAB transportation center. Dr. Staddon argued that some of the reasons traffic fatalities are greater in the United States than in the United Kingdom are traffic signs, speed limits, and cruise control.

According to Dr. Staddon, traffic signs distract drivers from the roadway. Instead of paying attention to the roadway, drivers look to the sides of the road in order to view the signs. Whereas, in the United Kingdom, many traffic signs are painted on the roadway, and they use roundabouts instead of stop signs in many instances.

Dr. Staddon stated that neighborhoods use stop signs too much. Additionally, stop signs are used for speed control in some instances, and as a result, "they require a stop even when stopping is not necessary for safety's sake." With respect to speed limits, the United Kingdom has three limits depending on the roadway: 30, 60, and 70. In the U.S., speed limits can vary from 45-80 on the same section of roadway. This causes drivers to focus on the signs and not road conditions.

Couple Dr. Staddon's arguments with the use of cell phones and drunk driving, you can imagine why so many catastrophic injuries and death occur on U.S. roads. Drivers take driving and health for granted and don't think about the damage even low speed impacts can cause (would you put your hand between two cars traveling at 5 mph?). This holiday season, think about these things while you are driving. Maybe you will save yourself, your family members, or someone else from an unwanted memory.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Asleep at the Wheel

Jon Lewis — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:20:20 GMT

On Monday, June 2, 2008, a horrible collision occurred on U.S. 280 in Mountain Brook. According to the Birmingham News, a 20-year old Auburn University student, Heather Eagan, may have fallen asleep, crossed the median, and killed Mary Anne Blake, the wife of former Birmingham City Councilman, Dr. Jimmy Blake. Miss Eagan was apparently driving back to Auburn from Illinois.

This type of collision shows how dangerous driving can be and what can happen if you lose focus on the road. Falling asleep, using a cell phone, drinking and driving, and violating the rules of the road in general can lead to accidents, injuries, and death. As a result, our system of laws allows for compensation to the victims of these accidents. This type of system not only compensates those who were injured, but it also punishes those who kill others on our roadways (Alabama only allows punitive damages for wrongful death, and look for more information on that in future articles on our site).

We want this system to work so that people will obey the laws and driver carefully. If they don't, there will be financial consequences and, possibly, criminal consequences. When you are on the roadways of Alabama, pay attention and be considerate of other drivers. Driving while drowsy risks other people's lives. Driving while on a cell phone risks other people's lives. Driving while intoxicated risks other people's lives. Is it worth it? Obviously not. All of these things can wait until you are no longer in a moving vehicle.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Minor Impact Accident

Jon Lewis — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:21:37 GMT

You are in a minor impact accident. Your neck hurts. You've been to the emergency room, and you are following up with a chiropractor. Do you have a case? Is it worth pursuing? Should you hire a lawyer? Maybe. Maybe not.

A lawyer cannot answer these questions if you are still treating with a physician. If you had one emergency room visit and you are doing better, you probably don't need a lawyer. However, if you have continued to have pain, the case needs to be investigated. You must weigh the cost/benefit analysis of whether or not employing an attorney is appropriate.

There are many occasions which have arisen where we have advised the potential client that she would be better off without an attorney. If the potential client is doing better physically and has been offered a settlement of $4,000.00 by the insurance company, the attorney with a one-third (1/3) contract will have to get a settlement of $6,000.00 just so the potential client would be where she was before she hired the lawyer, and that's before the lawyer's expenses. In such a situation, it would be ridiculous to hire a lawyer. However, if the attorney reviews the case and thinks he can obtain a much better result (say $25,000.00), you would be foolish not to employ the attorney.

Sometimes these cases are very difficult to evaluate until the medical treatment has been concluded. For example, we received an inquiry from a potential client who had a history of fibromyalgia. It had taken several years, but at the time of the accident, the client's pain was under control, and he was feeling better than ever.The client was involved in an accident with a truck, and all of a sudden, the hard work he had spent getting to feeling better was down the drain. Is that a case where the client should hire an attorney? We would say yes. Why? Well, it is going to be difficult for the client to get an insurance company to see things his way without an attorney.

There are many issues to consider when evaluating such a case. Can the witnesses be gathered and statements taken which show the pain was gone and has only returned because of this new accident? Will the doctor back up the client? Has the client kept a pain log to show when he was having pain and what medications he took? Was the driver of the truck a competent driver? Are there some facts which would show that not only should the insurance company for the truck compensate the client but that the driver should be punished, i.e.: he was on the cell phone, he was drunk, he had had numerous accidents before, etc. These are issues which take investigation and skill in putting the facts together for an insurance adjuster. It's not rocket science, but when you are injured and not feeling well, it is sometimes best for an independent, third party attorney to do the work for you.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Do you Really Know your Doctor?

Jon Lewis — Sat, 31 May 2008 10:00:00 GMT

When you or someone you know has been injured in an accident, there are several things you need to know about your medical treatment in the event your case eventually gets into litigation.

First, you need to make sure you relate your injuries to the accident when you go to the hospital or doctor. Once the case gets into litigation, the attorneys order all of the medical records. Jurors tend to believe what is written in the record as opposed to what you tell them so make sure the record is clear.

Second, in that same regard, make sure you and your doctor are on the same page. I cannot tell you how many times a client's doctor has testified in deposition that he either didn't know the client was in the accident or that the client did not attribute any of her symptoms to an accident. When you visit your doctor, the doctor listens and takes notes, either handwritten or via dictation. Ask him what he writes down or listen to what he dictates and make sure it's accurate. When your attorney takes his deposition a year or so later, he will go on what he wrote down or dictated, and he won't remember what you told him.

Third, make sure your doctor is not biased against these types of cases. Your doctor is the key to your case. If she testifies that your injuries were "possibly" caused by the accident, you're in trouble. "Possibly" doesn't cut it. The doctor MUST testify that the accident caused your injuries to a reasonable degree of medical probability (defense attorneys argue "to a reasonable degree of medical certainty" which is impossible - no one knows for certain unless the injury is clear). For some reason, many doctors just do not like these cases, and they don't seem to want to get involved and help their patient. Take care of this on the front end when you first meet with the doctor so her testimony doesn't bite you down the line.

Fourth, make your doctor spend time with you and explain his diagnosis and treatment plan. Many doctors come in and out of the examination room as if it were a drive thru window at a fast food restaurant. Ask questions so the doctor can't just up and leave. Make sure he understands what your problems are and how you were not having these problems before the accident.

Fifth, keep a log of your pain and the date, time and dosage of medications you take. When you take medication, it is pretty clear you are having pain, and such a log along with the dates and amounts of medication purchases can be clear evidence to a defense attorney and jury of the actually pain you were having.

These are just some helpful tips. Your doctor needs to believe in you and be your friend. Make sure that's the case because their testimony can kill the case if it's not in line.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Club Liable for Stripper's Car Accident?

Jon Lewis — Wed, 28 May 2008 11:00:00 GMT

This is an interesting case. The Birmingham News reported in its May 27 edition that Patsy Hamaker has sued her employer, the Furnace, as a result of a single car collision which occurred after work one evening. According to the article, the club encourages dancers to increase liquor sales by giving them a percentage of the drink sales. As a result, Ms. Hamaker allegedly became highly intoxicated and was allowed to leave work in that state.

Without knowing more facts, it is difficult to assess whether the Furnace would have liability in this situation. Surely, the club's owners will deny the allegations. Furthermore, even if they agree that they encouraged their dancers to increase drink sales of customers, they will most certainly argue that they do not encourage their dancers to actually drink the beverages and get drunk.

While I would not argue that this is a frivolous case, it will definitely lead to such arguments simply given the facts, and the tort reformers are probably licking their chops. They will argue that the employee should be responsible and not get intoxicated. But, this is a business which allegedly encourages intoxication because it leads to more money. Whether you approve of strip clubs or not, an employer of such a business should never allow an employee to leave work intoxicated. In fact, the employer should have a duty not to allow an employee to leave work intoxicated. This should be the case not only to protect the employee but, also, to protect the other motorists.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Car Accidents - Property Damage

Jon Lewis — Tue, 27 May 2008 18:41:08 GMT

You've been in a car accident. It's the other person's fault. Your six month old car is totaled (In Alabama, that means the damage is greater than 75% of the value of the car). You owe the finance company more than the car is worth. You tell the other person's insurance company to pay what you owe on the car, and the insurance company tells you, "No! We'll pay you what your car is worth." What do you do?

This is exactly the situation one of our clients is in right now. The insurance company has offered her $16,286.33, and she owes $22,700.00. When she gets the money from the insurance company, she'll still owe the finance company$6,413.67, and she'll have no car. Is that fair? No, but that's Alabama law.

For years, the law in Alabama has stated that your compensation for property damage is the difference in value of the car before the accident less the value of the car after the accident. Unfortunately, this law has not progressed with the times. Cars are expensive today. Most people finance their car for sixty (60) months. These same people are upside down on the car (owe more than it's worth) for the first two or three years of payments. When someone is negligent and totals the car, they should be liable for the other person's total damages. Those damages include what they owe the finance company.

How can you combat this problem? Unfortunately, the only real way to combat the problem is through the purchase of gap insurance. Who does that benefit? The insurance companies of course. Who else?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis

Following Rules of the Road

Jon Lewis — Mon, 26 May 2008 13:13:34 GMT

Do you follow the Rules of the Road? Did you even know that Alabama has a code section (Section 32-5A-1) governing the rules of the road? Remember that little book (Driver Manual) you had to study before obtaining your learner's permit? Most people forget about these rules immediately following their driver's license exam. Unfortunately, that occurs when you are sixteen (16).

On Saturday, the Birmingham News reported some of the results (here are the complete results) from the GMAC Insurance national driving test (click on this to take the test). According to the Birmingham News, sixteen percent (16%) or thirty-three million licensed drivers in the U.S. should not be behind the wheel. Alabama's rank was fifteenth (15th) which was much better than the State's 2007 result (25th).

When we hear all of the tort reform pundits, they seem to disregard these types of issues. Driving can be dangerous, and when someone does not know the rules of the road (and apparently, there are many of these someones), they can cause accidents and injuries. Not knowing these rules and violating them are negligent, and possibly wanton, actions. When someone does not know these rules, understand these rules, and abide by these rules, they should compensate the other party for their injuries when the person's negligence and/or wantonness caused the injuries. Tort reform rewards this ignorance of the rules of the road. Maybe the pundits should think about this.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jon Lewis