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

Currently, the personal injury lawyers at Sansone Law are representing several individuals for loss of smell and against Zicam. If you believe you have suffered Anosmia (loss of smell) from the use of Zicam you may have a case.

The loss of smell is a very serious and debilitating problem that also practically eliminates someones sense of taste along with their sense of smell due to the interplay between taste and smell. For more detail on Anosmia - loss of smell and it affects see the Anosmia Foundation.

Contact Us Now - Injury Lawyers that handle Zicam Loss of Smell Cases

Zicam and other Homeopathic remedies largly unregulated - Dever Post Article

Today, I was relieved when I heard him say the following:

"[...] I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards which I believe can be unfair to people who’ve been wrongfully harmed, I do think we need to explore a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first, let doctors focus on practicing medicine, and encourage broader use of evidence-based guidelines. That’s how we can scale back the excessive defensive medicine reinforcing our current system of more treatment rather than better care.”

Personal injury trial lawyers are usually painted as the special interest group that does not want any limitation on injury lawsuits. This is true as personal injury lawyers are the only group that advocate for those who may be harmed in the future. Individuals and families that have never been affected by medical mistakes usually see this issue as lawyer greed, however, those same people realize the importance of the issue of patient rights and justice as soon as their lives are touched by it.

The court found "nothing in the discovery rules which gives the circuit court the authority to compel a
party to sign a medical authorization form when informal discovery is involved. Of course, a
party may consent to signing a medical authorization form during informal discovery, but the
circuit court cannot force a party to do so."

The full opinion is available here: Ex rel. Collins v Roldan

the primary reasons I discuss this are that I am a bike accident personal injury lawyer and am currently representing an injured cyclist in St Louis Missouri that was injured under similar circumstances. As posted in a previous blog, my client was injured as the result of a a large fire hose laid across the road in spot that is not seen till the last second, at the bottom of a steep hill, and without any warning signs. See - St Louis Missouri Bike Accident Injury Lawyer Case.

I was browsing the Internet recently,and a reputable lawyer in Maryland was discussing his disgust with outrageous and frankly embarrassing advertisements by injury lawyers. See Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog

This attorney cited several injury lawyer ads listed in an Esquire magazine blog showing some of the most outrageous lawyer commercials around. While they are funny, it is also very serious topic, as many people hire lawyers based on these ridiculous and exaggerated ads. If you are form the St Louis are, you should recognize the third commercial down titled "the good guys". See Outrageous Lawyer Ads Article

As stated above and at the end of many injury lawyer advertisements, the choice of a lawyer is an important one and should not be based on advertisements alone. Many of these commercials do not back their claims up with results or discuss cases that were not handled by their own firm.

All cases discussed in my blog are cases I personally handled, each and every case discussed and illustrated on my website were handled by me. Except for only a very few cases discussed on my blog, but then I specifically state it was not a case I handled.

Be careful, many websites will publish outstanding results but do not specify that the case was theirs or not, thus implying to many people that the case was theirs.

So do not decide on a lawyer based on advertising, decide on a lawyer for other reasons, including, personal injury lawyers with experience backed up by past results, not silly claims crafted by marketing managers.

Missouri was one of the first states to implement this law for repeat offenders; ten other states have issued the law as prudent for first time DWI offenders, while many other states offer discretionary status of the law. The ignition interlock has been hailed as one of the most effective tools in the fight against drunk driving. Statistics in Missouri alone have revealed that almost 20 percent of highway deaths are a result of drunk driving, many of which were double the legal limit. This new device helps in ending the decades long debate against drunk driving while not infringing on public liberties. It is more useful in noting that offenders themselves believe this sanction to be fair and effective in forcing them to remain sober when operating their vehicle.

The ignition interlock device works by requiring the driver to blow into a type of breathalyzer which does not turn on the engine if the BAC is higher than a predetermined amount, usually around .025 in Missouri. Additionally, many interlock devices now require that the driver blow into them a second time while the car is in motion to guarantee that the driver themselves was the person blowing into the device (many times, a friend initially blows into the device). This second testing is not mandatory on all of the devices, but is an important aspect to guaranteeing the safety of roads from repeat offenders. If the driver fails this test, however, the car does not shut itself off as this is dangerous on a busy street, but rather sets of the alarm and causes the car to honk and flash unless the vehicle stops. This is important to alerting law enforcement to the driver’s condition; the device itself cannot stop the car once it is running, but this method is effective in causing the driver to stop the car.

Thus far, the device has been very effective in curbing the persistence of drunk drivers who continue their repeat behavior after multiple convictions. While many states have passed this law after first-time offenders, Missouri remains in the range of multiple convictions. It therefore becomes important to decide whether or not it should be made a mandatory device of first-time offenders. Organizations such as MADD list the fact that most first-time offenders have driven drunk around 87 times before they are pulled over for a first offense. This consequently determines that the device should be mandatory for many first-time offenders because of their previous actions, although Missouri has yet to include this in the law thus far. The addition of this law in general has proven to be a milestone in preventing repeat drunk drivers and has helped to ensure the general public’s safety on roadways.

This post was contributed by Kimberly Peterson, who writes about the criminal justice degree online. She welcomes your feedback at KimPeterson2006 at gmail.com

This was a contribution by a visiting author not associated with Sansone Law, LLC and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or positions of Sansone Law, LLC or Missouri InjuryLaw Blog or any of its personal injury lawyers or staff.

I don’t like the blemish that personal injury attorneys are seemingly required to wear. It’s the proverbial pimple in the middle of the forehead that detracts from the supermodel’s otherwise flawless face. We have all made our own little snarky attorney comments. We are all well aware of the “sharks” out there. Ad nauseam! I had a great mental picture of how this all worked. Mighty Joe client, down on the field, preparing to charge the innocent and weak defendant (dollar sign appropriately painted on his back), while hundreds of personal injury attorneys stood salivating, with calculators in hand, eagerly cheering Joe on.

Really, not all attorneys are the hostile piranha, ready to devour every doctor, small business owner or large corporation’s bank account, they are made out to be. You simply cannot lump them all together. We don’t hear about every car accident on the evening news because they are unfortunately so common. However, if there is a train wreck, it is covered by every station. They are decidedly less common. We always hear about those greedy personal injury attorneys that have wiped out companies, because they are not the norm. They are train wrecks. They are, without a doubt, the infection causing the big fat zit!

Most of you are visiting this site, obviously seeking an attorney.

Some of you may be feeling a bit guilty for considering a possible lawsuit. You don’t necessarily want to crush the culpable party, but you do need restitution and accountability for their mistake. You do not want to appear greedy, but medical bills are piling up. Ockham’s razor: don’t hire a train wreck! Hire an attorney with a reputation of one that uses the law for the goal of righting wrongs, not for financing dream beach houses. Don’t, not hold someone accountable because of a few trains that fell off the tracks. I find it interesting that personal injury attorneys appear more forgiving than most of their critics. Attorneys meet with some potential clients that literally reek with laziness and greed, yet they do not assume each client that walks through their door is out to retire off someone else. They assume that this person or person’s family has been wronged.

When I wrote in Blog#1, …..”he does not take cases without merit”, I unwittingly assumed readers knew that no attorney in their right mind would take a case destined for failure. Attorneys take cases where they can assume a probability of a positive outcome. By “merit” I was referring to the type of case described in the previous paragraph. Merit - meaning the quality of being deserving. Not “a case I can make a ton of dough off of.” Quite the opposite of that actually. This firm represents injured parties. Not greedy parties.

Apartment complexes are places that are often open to the public, thus, the apartment property owner has an obligation to provide a safe environment. Especially when the area is a known high crime area. We pulled the St Louis County police records that indicated over 200 calls to 911 from the apartment complex reporting crimes occurring there. Of those, there were about a dozen violent crimes that occurred in the year prior to our client becoming a victim to sexual assault, including two reported rapes. This is direct evidence that the apartment owner or managers knew or should have known about the potential danger, thus putting them on legal notice to substantiate a Missouri personal injury claim based on premise liability and negligent maintenance or security.

Apartment complex owners have a legal obligation to maintain the property in a safe condition, to protect their renters from personal injury. Common injuries include burglary, robbery, parking lot rape, sexual assaults, and murder that result from inadequate or negligent security.

Most shocking was that almost all of the building in the complex had defective, unmaintained, and just plain inoperative security doors. I walked through the entire complex and several residents showed me how easily their young children could just pull on the security doors and they would open or the doors were in such disrepair that the locking mechanism was missing entirely or would not latch to the door frame.

Premise Liability - Negligent Security at Apartment - $9 Million Verdict
Download file

Negligent security at apartment complex, rape in parking lot - $2.5 Million settlement.
Download file

My client lost his sense of smell as a direct result of the defective product. The case is currently in settlement negotiations, however, if we are not able to resolve the case we will be proceeding with a lawsuit. This is not a common injury, so a little research revealed some substantial verdicts and settlements wherein loss of smell was a primary injury.

$500,000 awarded to man who loses sense of smell as result of a fall down an Elevator shaft (http://www.siaccident.com/CM/Custom/Results.asp)

$1.2 MILLION. Recovery for emotional difficulties and loss of sense of smell and taste
Plaintiff carpenter fell six-feet from a scaffold, striking his head on the floor. Although diagnostic tests, including an MRI, did not show a brain injury, the plaintiff's family noticed a change in his behavior, and he complained of emotional difficulties and a loss of sense of smell and taste. (http://www.accidentslawyernewyork.com/verdicts-settlements)

$850,000 obtained for plaintiff
Woman strikes head in a car accident causing frontal subdural hematoma resulting in loss of sense of smell.
(http://www.gellerandsiegel.com/CM/Custom/Verdicts-Settlements.asp )

$12,000,000.00 ZICAM maker settles lawsuit over User’s Loss of Smell

Class action lawsuit alleging varying loss of smell for about 300 users.
(http://www.thedenverchannel.com/7newsinvestigates/6279576/detail.html)

$600,000 products liability settlement for loss of smell
Truck driver whose primary injury was the loss of his sense of smell. The truck driver claimed a design defect in a milk truck because it failed to provide a grab handle on the rear driver's side of the truck.
(http://www.marylandinjurylawyerblog.com/2006/06/600000_settlement_in_products.html )

Res Ipsa Loquitur is Latin for "the thing speaks for itself." It is a legal doctrine which dictates that when a personal injury occurs and there is no way the personal injury could have happened in the absence of negligence, then the injured victim does not have to prove a specific act of negligence.

Res Ipsa, under Missouri law, is an evidentiary rule allowing the jury to infer that a loss or injury was caused by a negligent act of the defendant, without requiring the victim to prove a specific act or acts of negligence.

Generally, res ipsa was not allowed for Missouri medical malpractice cases (except for very limited exceptions) until just recently after the Missouri Supreme Court's 2008 ruling in Sides v St Anthony's Medical Center, 258 S.W. 3d 811 (Mo. 2008). The Sides court ruled res ipsa is possible for all med mal cases as long as the following res ipsa elements are present and a medical expert testifies to such:

(a) the occurrence resulting in injury was such as does not ordinarily happen if those in charge use due care;
(b) the instrumentality involved was under the management and control of the defendant; and
(c) the defendant possesses superior knowledge or means of information as to the cause of the occurrence.

Now tort deform advocates try to argue that res ipsa allows a "presumption" of negligence and allows personal injury lawyers to unfairly target doctors. This is absolutely not true. It allows only an "inference" which still must be proven by the Plaintiff as more likely than not to have been below the standard of care and the proximate cause of the injury or loss.

An obvious example of why this is necessary: if you undergo an operation and wake up with a surgical device left in your body, you may not be able to prove the specific act (i.e. negligent doctor used the device, put it in the body, and forgot to take it out) because you were unconscious and maybe you see nothing about the device being left in you noted in the records as you have no control over them. Clearly, someone was negligent. The personal injury medical malpractice victim should not be forced to prove a specific act of negligence if there is no evidence of it. A surgical tool is not left in your body without someone being negligent. There are many cases that are not as clear and obvious as the example above; however, if a medical expert testifies that a particular result does not occur in the absence of negligence, then there is a submissible cause of action in Missouri for medical negligence.

Clearly, in the medical malpractice field this was a greatly needed victims' right issue, as health care providers possess much superior knowledge to what is going on in the operating room and the defendant is often the only witness to the negligence, which can easily be distorted or simply left out of the defendant's report. Trust me, this DOES happen more often than you may think. I have personally had doctors and nurses admit this to me off the record on several occasions.

Current Missouri medical malpractice case we are pursuing on a res ipsa theory as all the evidence of negligence was within the control of the defendant.

Example of Missouri Medical Malpractice Petition alleging Res Ipsa

My background is as a legal assistant to domestic/family law attorneys. I found myself in need of a job and was referred to this firm by a friend. When I heard this was a St Louis Missouri personal injury firm, I admit, I snarled a bit. Like most of you, my image of personal injury attorneys was of slick, omnivorous ambulance chasers, who dramatized every spilled coffee and grocery store fall. Being a research fanatic, I decided to find out more about this firm and what exactly personal injury attorneys do. So between the introductory phone call and the offer of employment, I did my homework. I have to say, my eyes were opened. I admit….I was wrong. So for all of you kindred cynics out there, let me break it down. This is what this particular personal injury law firm does. And this is why personal injury attorneys are so very needed.

The joke is that waitresses and beauticians are the only people not allowed to make mistakes. But the reality is, food can be remade and hair will eventually grow back. But what about errors made by professionals, corporations and manufacturers that are more difficult, if not impossible, to fix. They should be held to a strict standard of culpability for wrongdoing.

Most people immediately associate personal injury law with medical professionals. I know I did. Doctors do have an especially great obligation to serve their patients. My friend is dying of cancer and it is my belief that the erroneous methods used by her physician took away any chance for her recovery. There was no malicious intent behind his actions, but he was negligent and he should be held accountable.

I hear people question time and time again, what good would filing a lawsuit do, the damage has been done. Through carelessness, their mother, father or child has been injured or has even died. Why exacerbate the sorrow by filing a lawsuit? Two major reasons come to mind: personal injury cases are about accountability and compensation. We must get out of the mindset that lawsuits are for retribution. Lawsuits are not motivated by greed. Filing a lawsuit against a medical professional is supposed to stimulate a greater sense of responsibility in them. Also, families of victims of negligent acts need this option for a small amount of restitution for their loss. While no monetary sum can replace the loss, victims should not be responsible for the financial burdens that have accumulated through other’s carelessness.

Look through some of the firm’s cases listed on this site. You will find that loss is not only defined by the death of a loved one. There is loss of time at work or with family, loss of physical mobility in addition to financial loss. See how this firm has been relentless in making sure negligent drivers, corporations, medical professions, and other institutions and individuals are held accountable for their actions.

How many of you were told as a child, “You are known by the company you keep.” It does not matter if it is the choice of a friend you associate with or boss you work for. I needed a job, but I could afford to be a little picky. I was not going to knowingly choose to work for a person with a bad reputation. As I’m sure you deduced from the first paragraph, I tend to be a little too judgmental sometimes. I’m a tough critic. But, I guess I’m still waiting for the shoe to drop.

Mr. Sansone has a reputation for conquering tough cases where other firms could not. But make no mistake; he does not take cases without merit. Quite frankly, you do not want an attorney who is not passionate about your situation nor confident about your case. I encourage you to look at his qualifications. Look at his track record. Many of these cases you see were hand-offs from other firms that just could not get the job done. Contact him with any questions you may have. You should never be intimidated or apprehensive in speaking with your attorney because they work for you.

I hope you continue to read the blogs posted weekly. I hope you email me with your own experiences, topics you would like to discuss or questions you may have.

Under Missouri law, a driver overtaking a bicycle must maintain a safe distance. In this case the negligent driver failed to maintain a safe distance and caused a collision.

Missouri State Statute § 304.678 reads as follows:

Distance to be maintained when overtaking a bicycle.

Missouri Bike Statute 304.678. 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.

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.

Clearly, in this situation the negligent driver at best misjudged the speed the Missouri bike accident victim was traveling and not only attempted to pass him, but also made a right hand turn in front of him cutting him off and causing the crash.

Prior to my St Louis personal injury law firm being retained, another attorney encouraged this same bike accident injury victim to accept medical specials only as the top offer from the insurance company, fortunately he did not accept that offer and contacted us; we settled the case six months later for 3 times the amount the previous attorney advised was the best offer he would ever get.

As an avid cyclist myself I have had a few close calls and understand the fact that drivers simply choose not to notice cyclist on many occasions. Like em or not, in Missouri, bicyclists have the same rights to the roadway (except highways) as motorist do. Many lawyers who are not cyclists do not fully understand or believe in this right, but it is one that must be pursued aggressively for just resolution of Missouri or Illinois injury claims resulting from motorists hitting a bicyclist.

Illinois Car Accident - Work Comp Claims and 3rd Party Claims - Affects on Recovery by Victim when Competing Claims

The at fault driver had an Illinois automobile accident liability coverage of $100,000; initially the insurer for the negligent Illinois driver, denied paying on the claim. We immediately file d a lawsuit on behalf of our client and the day before all the party deposition were to take place we settled for $95,000 plus payment of all court costs. The Illinois worker's compensation claim resolved approximately 6 months prior to the negligence case and settled for $25,000 plus $60,000 in benefits paid.

Missouri Personal Injury Law - Child Injured by Unreasonably Dangerous Toy

It was a very difficult case from a liability standpoint as the toy knife was not blatantly dangerous looking. However, after comparing the rigid nature of the knife and the seemingly serrated edge to give it a more realistic look, with other similar toys on the market it became obvious to me this toy was dangerous for what it was intended for. The rigidity and serrated edge made it dangerous for little kids that it was marketed to. Most knifes in similar toy sets were very flexible with blunt and smooth edges for safety.

The Missouri personal injury products liability lawsuit was slated to go to trial in April 2009, however we were able to negotiate a settlement that paid for the minor child's medical bills plus and put a handsome amount of money into a protected savings account for her future education.