Missouri Injury Law Blog

While on the job my client was injured as a pedestrian after he was crossing Delmar Blvd in St Louis, Missouri, near its intersection with Union. The light for eastbound traffic was red but there was a green arrow for eastbound traffic to turn North (left) at Union. As my client, a pedestrian, was crossing the road, about four car lengths from the crosswalk, a stopped driver waved him to walk by, as he stepped into the turn lane he looked left and the roadway was clear, as he was crossing a speeding car that was trying to beat the light struck him and fractured his left tibia (lower leg). The police responded to the car and pedestrian accident injury and the report was inconclusive as to fault.

Being that my client was on the job at the time of the car and pedestrian collision, this was immediately claimed through Missouri workers compensation and the employer's work comp insurer covered my client's medical expenses and lost wages. Additionally, we pursued a 3rd party claim, for personal injury sustained in St Louis Missouri, on behalf of our client against the negligent car driver for striking him as a pedestrian.

As a personal injury lawyer I have to recognize that often my client's cases have weaknesses, and this case was no exception. The weaknesses in this case included that he was crossing Delmar without using the cross walk. Additionally, he partially relied on an unknown driver waving him through traffic to rely that the roadway was clear. On the other hand, the other driver was speeding and claimed he was heading to church, however, in order to go to his church he would have had to head south on Union. This combined with several other inconsistencies that I highlighted in the driver's deposition testimony battered his credibility and helped secure a favorable personal injury settlement.

We were able to resolve the workers compensation case and the 3rd party liability case for about $90,000 combined. We were able to maximize client recovery by minimizing the workers compensation lien on the 3rd party liability case. The 3rd party liability case settled favorably about 30 days before trial.

Posted by Benjamin J. Sansone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Our Injury Cases , Verdicts & Settlements , Workers' Compensation

Bookmark:

A speeding driver hit and killed a 17 year old boy after he crashed into the back of the bicyclist at about 100 mph. The cyclist was killed by the collision. The wrongful death was clearly the driver's fault, however, despite his excessive speed no criminal charges were brought. Even more insulting to the cyclist's family, the driver sued them for the damage to his car.

In reaction to the property damage lawsuit, the parents were quoted as stating, "It's the final straw, a stab in the back ... [b]efore the lawsuit we thought the poor guy would find it hard to live the rest of his life with the thought of having caused our son's death."

As previously discussed in my other bicycle accident and injury related blog entries, I have seen first hand, as a St Louis Missouri injury lawyer representing injured cyclists, the prejudice and disrespect shown by drivers, witnesses ,and even jurors towards cyclists. It is important to work around this aversion many people have against cyclists, primarily from their frustration from a few cyclists they have encountered on the road. This is crucial to successful resolution of a bike injury case.

As an experienced St Louis Missouri and Illinois bicycle accident and bicycle injury lawyer I have successfully dealt with these hurdles in bike accident cases that often find their way to me after the initial injury lawyer drops the case or does not pursue it very diligently for many of the same reasons discussed above.

Posted by Benjamin J. Sansone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Bicycle Accidents

Bookmark:

In the St Louis County municipality of Wildwood Missouri, a single car accident occurred when a teenager lost control of his vehicle, ran of the road, and struck a utility pole. The negligent driver had several passengers in his car, and one of them, a teenage girl, is my client. My client suffered serious personal injuries as a result of the auto accident, including visible scarring, a broken nose, injured neck and back, and a deviated septum. Her claim could easily be worth more than the $100,000, the limit of auto insurance the driver had and that is available to satisfy her car accident claim. This means it is my job as the injured passenger's personal injury attorney to find all sources of liability and potential insurance coverage to make sure that there is adequate coverage to pay all of her legally justifiable damages. Including, stacking auto insurance policies, adding all under-insured motorist coverage, med pay coverage, umbrella policies, and any potential liability on behalf of the state or local government based on road safety conditions.

Being an aggressive St Louis Missouri injury lawyer, The driver was issued several citations as a result of the accident, therefore, should he plea guilty or be found guilty of any of the violations the case may become a "negligence per se" case. Meaning, the issue of liability is essentially admitted through the plea or finding of guilty in the related criminal case. Additionally, liability also exists beyond mere negligent operation of the automobile because the tires on the car involved in the accident were bald (see pic); therefore, the parents that owned the car were negligent in maintaining the vehicle which contributed to the cause of the accident; primarily the loss of control of the vehicle.

Many Missouri and Illinois injury attorneys may overlook these collateral sources of insurance and simply stay with the primary coverage. Before settling a multi-million dollar case about a year ago, the lead defense lawyer for the hospital stated to my clients that I and my co-counsel were very aggressive. This was a major factor to securing a massive settlement for our clients because we explored every possible source of legal liability and came up with unique and sound legal theories to impose liability on several parties; thus maximizing the result for our clients on whose behalf we brought a Missouri wrongful death claim in the St Louis City Circuit Court.

Posted by Benjamin J. Sansone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Our Injury Cases , Automobile Accidents

Bookmark:

As an Illinois injury lawyer with a significant Missouri and Illinois medical malpractice legal practice, I am always keeping an eye on the interests of future injured victims and whether or not they will have any rights left in the years to come as the recent trend in Misosuri and Illinois, as well as other states. For the last 10 years their has been a constant and significant erosion of medical malpractice victim rights. Illinois is starting to swing that pendulum back to where it belongs, recently, a Circuit Court Judge for Cook County Illinois ruled that the damage cap provision of the 2005 Illinois Tort Reform Statute (Public Act 94-677) which limits non-economic damages to $500,000 against doctors and $1,000,000 against some hospitals, is unconstitutional. The Judge ruled that the act infringed on the jury's deliberation and amounts to a "legislative remittur" of the jury's findings. Remittur is when the court reduces a verdict based on several factors, but essentially the court will reduce the verdict amount if it is clearly excessive based on the facts of the case. The tort reform act is imposing remittur without consideration of the merits of the specific case, thus infringing on the provence of the jury and unconstitutional. Moreover, the tort reform act did not contain a severability clause, a clause that allows the rest of the act to survive if one portion is found unconstitutional; therefore, the entire act is deemed unconstitutional.

This is clearly a victory for victims and the trial lawyers bar, particularly Illinois injury trial lawyers (one of the few only organizations that represent the interests of future injured parties).

Clearly, this ruling will be challenged on appeal and this issue will likely go to the Supreme Court of Illinois despite the ruling on the appellate level. However, this ruling represents a victory in one of many battles of the war between medical malpractice victims and the insurance companies using their money and political influence to unfairly change the laws to protect their pocket books at the detriment of innocent people injured by the carelessness of others who they believe deserve special treatment because it says M.D. after their name.

Missouri's tort reform act that was also signed into law in 2005, has lower damage caps of $350,000 (which can not be adjusted for inflation) as well as several evidentiary rules that improperly tips the scales of justice in favor of insurance companies. A few examples. the collateral source rule, the defendant can get in evidence that the victim had insurance coverage or other financial support to help pay the bills, but the jury cannot be allowed to know the defendant has liability coverage, to even mention it or imply it is grounds for a mistrial. The other examples are presumption of bills paid as damages, requirement of a certificate of merit by a specialist in the exact same field for filing a Missouri Medical Malpractice case, venue rules as the place of injury as the only venue for the cause of action, and the list goes on, not even to mention the changes to Missouri's Workers Compensation laws.

Hopefully some cases facing the same issues for Missouri's 2005 Tort Reform act will start to raise these same questions and strike portions of the Tort Reform act as unconstitutional as well. However, the cases have to work their way through the system but we should start seeing them soon.

Posted by Benjamin J. Sansone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Injury Law , Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

June 2007, in Springfield Missouri, a bicycle accident occurred when Mike was riding his bicycle North on Campbell Rd, and a truck owned by an electric company and operated by an employee, overtook Mike and proceeded to make a right hand turn cutting him off and causing a collision between the truck and the bike. This common bicycle accident scenario is referred to as the "Right Hook". See the Police Report Excerpt Below.

Under Missouri law, bicyclists are to be treated as other vehicles; for instance, under Missouri law a vehicle is not to cut a bicyclist off, pass a bicyclist unsafely, or pull out in front of a bicyclist. Many drivers ignore the safety and well-being of cyclists and feel they should no be on the road and thus sometimes act hostile towards bicyclists.

Missouri Statute § 307.188 - Rights and duties of bicycle and motorized bicycle riders: “Every person riding a bicycle or motorized bicycle upon a street or highway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle as provided by chapter 304, RSMo[.]”

Missouri State Statute § 304.678-"Distance to be maintained when overtaking a bicycle - The operator of a motor vehicle overtaking a bicycle proceeding in the same direction on the roadway, as defined in section 300.010, RSMo, shall leave a safe distance when passing the bicycle, and shall maintain clearance until safely past the overtaken bicycle."

As many drivers feel about cyclists, so do injury lawyers and insurance adjusters. I was hired to represent Mike after his local lawyer secured a settlement for his medical bills only and did not want to pursue it any further. Insurance adjusters need to be convinced that a cyclist's case is just as worthy as if they were in a car and were cut off. Legally, the liability is no different, however the prejudice against cyclists as a nuisance on the road is ever present and must be overcome by aggressive legal representation of your injury claim.

Missouri Bike Accident and Injury Lawyer Reference - Petition for Collision caused by the Right Hook or Failure to Yield

Posted by Benjamin J. Sansone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Our Injury Cases , Bicycle Accidents

Bookmark: