Missouri Injury Law Blog

In May 2008 my client was struck by a Hummer H2 while legally traveling on his bicycle in a designated bike lane in the Soulard area of St Louis MO. He proceeded through an intersection that had no stop sign for his direction of travel, however, the cross traffic had a stop sign and the other driver went through the stop sign and violated my client cyclist's right of way and causing a collision which resulted in serious personal injury. (See police report diagram of St Louis Bike Accident)

This type of vehicle and bicycle collision is referred to as the right cross. As a Missouri and Illinois personal injury lawyer, I represent multiple bike accident and injury clients, two I am currently handling were a result of the above mentioned "right cross". Both were legally and properly either traveling in a bike lane, legally on the shoulder of the road as allowed by Missouri bike law, or properly crossing a pedestrian crosswalk on their bike.

In this case, we recovered $100,000.00 policy limit for our bike accident personal injury client. This amount represents the full policy limit the owner of the vehicle had through GEICO Insurance. However, in this case, the driver did not own the vehicle, therefore, we are also pursuing the driver's insurance policy limit of $50,000.00 as excess insurance coverage.

A few legal hoops need to be hopped through prior to settling the primary personal injury liability insurance coverage, as in this case, the primary insurer (GEICO) has a duty to get all potential liable parties released. Therefore, we entered into a Missouri personal injury release agreement completely releasing the owner of the vehcile from liability and releasing the driver for nay amount of a judgement over and above the additional $50,000.00 policy limit through her personal auto insurance policy.

This Missouri personal injury settlement arrangment keeps the door cracked for recovery in excess of the bodily injury liability insurance policy limits, this is done if the excess carrier refuses to settle within policy limits, if a judgment is then obtained against the driver in excess of the policy limits, then the driver assigns to my client any right for bad faith refusal to settle against the injury insurer, which can potentially make the personal injury insurer liable beyond its bodily injury policy limits. That is the heart of the agreement entered into to settle the primary personal injury auto insurance coverage and still have the potential to still pursue the Missouri bike accident personal injury case against the at fault party. We have done this in several other cases with much success, it is called a covenant not to enforce judgment - See Illinois Drunk Driving Accident - Covenant not to Enforce. This is an example of the injury release we used in this case but it is from another case we handled that involved an Illinois drunk driving personal injury lawsuit that stemmed from a high speed rear end collision that caused a severe head and brain injury to my client as well as multiple other injuries. That case settled for just under $750,000.00 with another $250,000.00 of insurance we are still pursuing.

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

Posted In: Bicycle Accidents , Verdicts & Settlements

Bookmark:

Authored by Sansone Law staff member, Erin Mace.

Wrongful Death lawsuit filed by parents of high school student killed in drunk driving incident.

I was pursuing some news sites relating to personal injury and came across this tragedy. Two young men, 16 and 20 years of age, were walking home from a birthday party and were fatally struck by a drunk driver.

The “adults” overseeing the birthday party chose to allow the teens to drink alcohol. The boys made the choice to break the law and drink. The drunk driver had just stolen a car from a deli around the block. The owner of the stolen car had left the car running to hurry in the deli, get his sandwich and leave. It was a night of bad decisions that culminated in two deaths. The drunk driver, who incidentally has a rap sheet a mile long, was laughing when he was picked up a block from the incident.

The parents of the 16 year old have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against not only the drunk driver who hit the teen and the parents who hosted the birthday party but also the man whose car was stolen.
One of the many lessons I am learning while working at this St Louis personal injury law firm is that just because you are emotionally hurt or angry – even justifiably so – that does not mean the source of that anguish was an illegal action. I am in complete agreement with holding the parents who held the party responsible, assuming the kids intoxication contributed to the incident, they are legally responsible. I am definitely in complete agreement with holding the drunk driver responsible. I think we can all agree on this one. However, I believe it is a stretch to try and hold the owner of the stolen car responsible. I’m not sure how the owner of the vehicle could have had any foreseeable knowledge of the evening’s outcome from leaving his car running outside a deli. This guy was actually the only one who did not commit a crime that night – but he is getting sued. I find it ironic that the parents of the victims place no responsibility on their own son who blatantly broke the law and instead chose to place even a small amount of blame on a guy that just wanted a sandwich. Talk about laughable lawsuits. Out of the four articles I read on this tragedy, not once did the parents even hint that their son’s decision had an impact on that evening. They are angry and sad and want to make everyone pay - and they got some bad legal advice. As far as the drunk driver goes – he was just selfish. He selfishly put the lives of more than just two teenagers at risk by choosing to operate a vehicle drunk. Perhaps if he would not have been let off of the countless other crimes he committed, he would not have even been there to kill those two kids.

Morals of the story: If you choose to break the law, prepare to suffer the consequences and not blame other people. Simon and Garfunkel were dead wrong. No one is a rock or an island to themselves. Everyone’s choices and actions affect those around you - even those of us that have no desire to be affected by your choices or actions. Finally, if your loved one is injured or killed hold the true liable party responsible. Contact a good attorney that specialized in wrongful death and can distinguish who is legally at fault.

St Louis personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone's comments on Erin's article:

I understand that it may be confusing why a personal injury lawyer filing a wrongful death case would add a party like the owner of the stolen car above. However, in tragic incidents like this there is sometimes little or no insurance coverage. I am willing to bet the drunk driver has few assets, hopefully he at least had auto insurance. I believe the personal injury lawyer in this drunk driving wrongful death case is properly representing his client by initially investigating and naming all parties that may be responsible. I am sure that the family and the attorney have no interest in punishing the car owner and would almost certainly never attempt to collect over and above his insurance policy limits. If the facts all come down that the owner was simply was getting a sandwich, any competent insurance defense lawyer will ultimately get the case dismissed or prevail at trial.

Posted by Erin Mace | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Wrongful Death , Staff articles - Erin's Corner

Bookmark:

Most people outside the personal injury legal profession and liability insurance often do not understand the nature of the parties' relationships when a claim is made against someone for negligence. For example, lets take a Missouri car accident that results in an injury and a driver was negligent. When a personal injury claim is made (the "claimant" or "Plaintiff"), the insurance company for the at fault driver (the "insured" or "Defendant") handles it, if the personal injury claim cannot be settled and the at fault driver is sued the insurance company appoints a lawyer. More times than not, the law firm or lawyer appointed by the insurance company handles many cases for that particular insurance company; however, their ethical and legal duty is to represent the at fault driver or the "insured", that is their client, not the insurance company. This is a line that is all too often blurred in favor of the best interests of the insurance company rather than the insured. Moreover, the insurance company has a duty to defend in good faith and indemnify the insured for any settlement or judgment.

So what does it mean to defend in "good faith", quite simply, it means that the insurance company has a duty to consider the insured's interests and if those interests conflict with the insurance company's interests, good faith obligates the insurance company to sacrifice its interests in favor of the insured's. This was discussed by the Missouri Supreme Court in Zumwalt v. Utilities Insurance Company, 228 SW2d 750 (MO 1950) and affirmed by a recent case which upheld a bad faith judgment against Allstate Insurance Company for a little over 16 million dollars after they refused to settle a Missouri drunk driving case with severe injuries for policy limits of $50,000. See Johnson v. Allstate Insurance Company, 262 SW3d 658 (Mo App Ct WD 2008).

The Johnson case is a perfect example of bad faith by an insurance company involving a Missouri personal injury claim resulting from a Missouri drunk driving collision and subsequent lawsuit. The insured, Davis, had twice the legal limit and struck a car head on when he crossed the center line, both passengers in the other vehicle spent many weeks in the hospital and almost died. Several weeks after the accident the claimants/Plaintiffs were willing to settle the case for $50,000, Davis' (the insured's) policy limits, thus relieving him of any other potential judgment or legal action, done case should have been closed. However, Allstate failed to respond for several months to the demand for a case that was an obvious policy limits case. The demand expired after 60 days because Allstate would not pay its policy limits, why? they were looking out for Allstate rather than their insured. Even if the injuries were not that severe, a drunk driver is open to serious liability after a motor vehicle accident causing injury. The potential for high liability due to the reckless conduct of the drunk driver should have been enough for Allstate to tender policy limits to protect their insured.

So who brings the bad faith claim? In most cases the claimant or Plaintiff takes an assignment of the cause of action from the insured or defendant in exchange for a promise not to try and collect from the insured or defendant personally and just go after the insurance company because they refused to settle the case when they had an opportunity. Under Missouri and Illinois bad faith, the insurance company is liable for any judgment in excess of the policy limits if they refused to settle the case when they had the opportunity and enough information to justify resolving the case for such an amount.

This is a necessary and reasonable tool for Plaintiffs and insureds to have, without it large insurance companies would use their financial clout and resources to spend all victims of personal injury, with viable claims, out of legitimate claims to protect their bottom line and to the determent of victims and their insureds.

Currently we are handling several Missouri and Illinois serious injury claims arising from drunk driving accident wherein the insurance companies are using delay tactics and acting in bad faith while the victims, my clients, are the targets of medical bill collectors, some are close to poverty because their injuries left them with the inability to work, and their lives are forever changed for the worse. These case were previously mentioned int his blog and will be updated:

Good Samaritan struck by drunk driver, severely injured, partial disability

Illinois Drunk Driving Accident - Drunk Truck Driver Severely Injures 4 Teenagers - traumatic brain injuries.

Illinois Drunk Driving Accident Lawsuit - High Speed Rear End Collision at Intersection - Driver Pleads Guilty to DUI

In this above immediately above, we demanded policy limits, Allstate rejected, several months later during the defendant/insured's deposition he testified that he was completely unaware my client had demanded policy limits or that she was willing to settle with in his policy limits. A key indicator of Bad Faith by the insurance company for failure to inform their insured of a settlement offer within auto insurance policy limits. Clear evidence of Allstate looking out for themselves, not their insured. "Good hands", sure they are.

Also, excellent article summarizing Illinois Bad Faith Insurance Law

Illinois Bad Faith Law - Insurance Company refusal to settle - another excellent article regarding bad faith insurance law in Illinois

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

Posted In: Injury Law

Bookmark: