Missouri Injury Law Blog

Last year during a snow storm in St. Louis, my client was involved in a truck accident when she was ran off the road by a MoDOT snow plow on Highway I-270 in St Louis county. She was driving her car in the far right hand lane since she was going slow due to the weather. A snow plow came up behind her, sideswiped her car, and then kept on going and left her stranded on the side of the road.

The truck accident left several large orange paint streaks down the side of the victim's car. The pain was the same orange color as the snow plow orange. The reporting officer noted the orange paint and was unable to reach MoDOT for any response. The victim retained our St Louis accident attorneys and we were able to get MoDOt to admit that the snow plow in the area of the accident that night was reported as being damaged on the right side of the snow plow. Damage completely consistent with the auto accident our client reported.

Our client sustained injuries to her neck and back, reported to the emergency room and then followed up with her family doctor and received physical therapy for a few months. The victim fully recovered and incurred about $10,000 in total medical bills. Prior to filing a lawsuit MoDOT agreed to settle the truck injury claim for $85,000.00.

Personally, I was very pleased with the outcome of this case, we were able to get my client all the medical treatment she needed to fully and completely recover and then settle her case for over 8 times the amount of the medical bills without having to file a lawsuit. The victim int his case was a past client of ours, therefore, she knew to contact us immediately after being involved in an auto accident. Retaining an accident lawyer early on in your case is critical to successful and very favorable recoveries.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Alton Illinois cyclist Killed by Semi-Trailer Truck

Truck Accident Causation - Critical Factors

Continue reading "$85,000.00 Settlement against MoDOT for St Louis Snow Plow Collision " »

St Louis accident attorneys, Sansone / Lauber, obtained a favorable settlement in Cape Girardeau County on behalf of a Scott County high school student who was injured after a loose door divider fell and struck him on the head when he was walking through a gymnasium doorway. The lawsuit settled for a very favorable $75,000.00, plus court costs, about two weeks prior to trial. The injured Plaintiff suffered a concussion and incurred approximately $5,000 in medical bills. The claim was made against Scott County School District. See : PETITION - dangerous condition - School_Redacted.pdf.

When making an accidental injury or negligence claim against a public entity, such as a pubic school, certain issues must be considered and investigated since public entities have certain tort immunity under Missouri law. See: Government Entity Liability for Dangerous Conditions. Specifically, you must determine if the accidental injury you are making a claim for falls under one of the exceptions to sovereign immunity, additionally, you need to look for other 3rd parties that may be liable if the sovereign immunity caps apply and the damages from the injuries may exceed those caps.

In our recent Cape Girardeau premises liability case cited above, the school district was unable to dispute that the Plaintiff was injured by a loose double door divider that fell and struck the Plaintiff in the head as he walked through the doorway during gym class. The Defendant, Scott County High School, and its employees, had exclusive control over the gym doors, including the post. Additionally, we were able to show that Scott County had actual notice the center divider was loose or had fallen out the night prior to Plaintiff's injury.

The night before the negligent head injury, a teacher had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition. The school nurse testified that she heard from school employees the center divider fell out of the doorway the night before at the basketball game. Additionally, another teacher that was at the game, testified she leaned against the center divider and it moved, then a spectator at the basketball game tightened it up with just his hands, no tools. That same teacher testified nothing else was done to that center divider and she did not notify anyone. Cursory investigation fo the doorway showed that hand tightening would not be effective, the fastener holding the center pole is a small Allen bolt that is smooth without anyway to grip other than using an Allen wrench or pliers.

The Plaintiff was sent to the emergency room and diagnosed with a concussion. One year after the head injury, medical records documented that the Plaintiff was still suffering from post concussion symptoms including headaches.

RELATED BLOG POSTS

$575,000.00 Injury Settlement - Illinois Head / Brain Injury Settlement - Illinois Drunk Driving Car Accident Lawsuit

Evidentiary Issues to Consider under Missouri Law for a Slip and Fall Personal Injury Trial

Continue reading "Head Injury Settlement - Student Struck in Head at Missouri High School " »

Recently, St Louis injury law firm Sansone / Lauber secured a $760,000.00 settlement for our client who was sexually assaulted in her apartment. See Defective and Poorly Maintained Security Doors.

The parties involved in the settlement are being kept confidential to protect the identity of our client, however, I can say that the defendant was a St Louis area apartment owner that we maintained had knowledge of the crime levels in the area based on crime statistics available to them and reported crimes at the apartment complex. Despite the levels of crime the property owner allowed the common area security doors to remain in disrepair despite consistent complaints by the tenants.

Unfortunately, as a result of the inoperable security doors, a criminal was able to easily and quickly obtain access to our client's apartment making her an easy target for burglary and sexual assault. Several witnesses testified to the poor conditions and upkeep of the common area security doors as well as the apartment front doors and to the crime level in the neighborhood as well. There were constant complaints to management regarding the conditions and security concerns. Some issues were dealt with for temporary resolution and many issues were simply ignored. Several assaults and robberies took place against tenants and food delivery drivers.

In order to have a claim against a property owner, there must not only be a criminal act that causes injury, you must first establish a legal duty on the property owner to protect you from that criminal act.

ESTABLISHING A LEGAL DUTY TO PROVIDE SECURITY:

DUTY AS A MATTER OF LAW: Under Aaron v Havens.pdf there is a duty as a matter of law on a landlord to keep the common areas safe. In the Aaron case where a rape occurred after access by the intruder up the fire escape and through an unlocked apartment window the court stated "[i]f a private apartment can be entered through a window, injury to the occupants is foreseeable."

The scope of admissible evidence under Aaron is broad. Therein the Court held: "it is not necessary to allege that past crimes involving entry into unauthorized places are of the same general nature as the one which gave rise to the claim. If a burglar may enter, so may a rapist. To find a duty only the incidence of harm, not necessarily the quantum need be foreseeable."

In our case, we argued the Arron case applied as the building security doors and the apartment front doors were controlled by the owner according to the undisputed testimony of the witnesses. Thus, it is common area and according to Aaron there is a duty as a matter of law. Additionally, in our case the owner breached the duty by providing the locked doors and barely attempting to maintain them through cheap temporary fixes.

DUTY ESTABLISHED BY SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS:

If the duty is not established as a matter of law, a duty can be imposed on a land owner based on special relationships. For a detailed discussion of the special relationships duty see Legal Elements and Issues Related to 3rd Pary Criminal Act Personal Injury cases in Missouri.

RELATED BLOG POSTS:

Missouri Law on Suing a Property Owner for Negligent Security after a Criminal Attack - Assumption of the Duty

Negligent Security - is the Starbucks Tip Jar Lawsuit a Good Case?

Missouri Waiver of Personal Injury From Future Negligence Clauses in Apartment Lease Contracts - Are they Enforceable?

Continue reading "$760,000.00 Settlement - St Louis Negligent Security resulting in Sexual Assault" »

Recently we settled a negligent hydraulic hose repair and thumb injury case pending in Perry County Missouri. The thumb injury occurred as the result of a hydraulic tractor hose that sprung a small leak and shot a very thin and strong stream of hydraulic fluid into my client's thumb. Hydraulic oil injection injuries are deceiving because the injury seems minor at first, however, the hydraulic oil is very toxic and quickly causes injury to spread.

A hydraulic fluid injection injury is probably the most dangerous injury that can result from a hydraulic hose failure. Mainly because the injury appears benign at first, so the injured person often dismisses it and no urgent medical care is sought. Injected hydraulic oil is highly toxic, so in addition to the physical, and often appearing minor, physical cut, the oil literally poisons you.

The most important things to remember: NEVER touch a pressurized hose with your hand and if you suspect an injection injury has occured, get to an emergency room right away!

In our case, the victim was the owner of a tractor. One of the tractor's hydraulic hoses became frayed near the end of the hose. The metal mesh under-layer began to show through the thick rubber outer-layer. The owner became concerned about the integrity of the hose and took it to the local hardware store for replacement. While at the hardware store they told him they could repair the hose rather than replace it, they would cut the frayed part off and reattach the hose connector at the end. The repair was made, however, a few inches of the hose still showed some metal coming through; the hardware store employee insisted it was safe and blew into it using his mouth to show no air was leaking through.

The owner reattached the hydraulic hose and within minutes a very strong and needle thin stream of hydraulic fluid came from the frayed area and shot into the owner's thumb.

The hardware store was liable as they represented themselves as a competent and professional hydraulic hose repair and/or replacement shop. The tractor owner relied on the employee's guarantee that the repair was done correctly, despite his concern.

This was a very unique case as hydraulic injuries resulting on negligent repair are very rare and there is little industry literature or material addressing how hydraulic hoses must be repaired. Therefore, the legal theory was a general negligence claim, no established standards or rules were violated, just what we claimed to be general negligence by the hardware store through its employee.

Continue reading "$250,000.00 Settlement: Hydraulic Fluid Injection Injury resulting from Negligent Hose Repair " »

Last year, we discussed Missouri punitive damages under Ronald Sanders v. Iftekhar Agmed, MD, et al, one of several cases to go before the Missouri Supreme Court on the issue of punitive damages caps. Last month, one of these cases was decided. If this case is a harbinger of what's to come, then it looks like these caps are here to stay.

The case is Estate of Overbey v. Chad Franklin National Auto Sales North, LLC, and was issued on January 31, 2012 from an en banc panel of the Missouri Supreme Court. While the case was about fraudulent misrepresentation under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) instead of personal injury, many of the issues are applicable to personal injury cases. At trial, the Overbeys were awarded $1,000,000 in punitive damages against Chad Franklin, the proprietor of the dealership. Pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. Section 510.265, Mr. Franklin had the damages reduced to $500,000.

Under 510.265, - Limits of Punitive Damages in Certain Cases - "No award of punitive damages against any defendant shall exceed the greater of (1) Five hundred thousand dollars; or (2) Five times the net amount of the judgment awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant." On appeal, the Overbeys claimed that the reduction violated their rights to trial by jury. The "trial by jury" claim was also the basis for the plaintiff's appeal in Sanders.

The Missouri Constitution states that "the right of trial by jury as heretofore enjoyed shall remain inviolate." Mo. Const. art. I, § 22(a). Further, in Scott v. Blue Springs Ford Sales, Inc., 176 S.W.3d 140 (Mo. banc 2005), the Court held that the right to have a jury determine damages applies to any law that allows for damages as a remedy. This includes both nominal and punitive damages. However, in this case, the Court made clear that just because a plaintiff has the right to have a jury determine damages does not mean that he is entitled to unlimited damages "under the MMPA or under any statute" (emphasis added). So long as application of the cap did not interfere with how the case was decided, application of s 510.265 does not violate the Missouri Constitution.

The plaintiffs also alleged that the reduction of their punitive damages awards violated separation of powers, equal protection, their due process rights, and Missouri's prohibition on "special laws." The Court rejected each one of these challenges.

While this case was not about personal injury per se, the phrase "under any statute" gives the court plenty of room to find caps on punitive damages constitutional in a tort context. We should be getting a decision on Sanders in the next month or two. However, if it follows the lead of the court in Overbey, it appears that the 2005 tort reforms, including punitive damage caps, are here to stay.

See Our Related Blog Posts:
Today the Missouri Supreme Court had a Hearing on the Constitutional Challenges to the Missouri Medical Malpractice Damage Caps

Sansone obtains Punitive Damages Jury Verdict - 700 times actual damages.

A St Louis medical negligence lawsuit we have been working on for several years settled for over $900,000. The injured Plaintiff was seen by a St Louis doctor who performed a cervical nerve root block. See Negligent Pain Injection Lawyer. Within fifteen minutes of the procedure she was left partially paralyzed, fortunately, she has mostly recovered from her paralysis and was able to return to her full time job.

We believe that the negligent doctor caused the partial paralysis by allowing the medicine to invade an artery through a combination of negligent techniques. One, the dosage of the pain medication steroid was double the recommended amount, two, the operative technique was negligent as he failed to use tubing between the syringe and needle to minimize needle movement, and three, the basic placement of the needle prior to the injection was in a dangerous location. See St Louis Medical Malpractice Lawyer Article: "Missouri Medical Negligence - Cervical Pain Injection Hits an Artery - Med Mal causes Depo Medrol to go into Spinal Cord and Brain - Spinal Cord Injury and Brain Injury resulting in Partial Paralysis"

Despite our injured client's neurological deficits, she missed only a few months of work and was able to return to her job full time within months of the spinal cord injury. She incurred about $200,000 in medical bills as a result of the injury and no lost wages. Generally, arterial invasion by a steroid results in devastating injuries and death, our client was lucky that her injuries were relatively minor.

One of the essential requirements to successfully pursuing a medical malpractice lawsuit is retaining a good medical expert. See St Louis Medical Negligence Attorney Article: "Use of Expert Witnesses by Missouri Injury Attorneys to successfully pursue Missouri Injury Claims and Lawsuits" Not only do you need an expert to testify regarding liability or negligence (violation of the medical standard of care), but before a Missouri medical negligence lawsuit can even be filed you must have a certificate of merit under Missouri Statute 538.225 or else the medical malpractice lawsuit will be dismissed. In fact, before retaining our St Louis medical malpractice law firm, our client initially retained another personal injury lawyer, however, they failed to file a certificate of merit and her case was dismissed. Additionally, they decided not to pursue the case after consulting with a medical expert. After we received the file, we immediately retained a well known and qualified expert in the field of diagnostic radiology. In fact, through a little research, we found out the expert the previous attorneys consulted with is a well defense expert, so obviously he talked the case down and immediately defended the negligent doctor.

Medical malpractice cases are time intensive, difficult, and very expensive. Many lawyers claim they handle medical malpractice cases, however few can successfully pursue them with excellent results. Choose your lawyer carefully.

Continue reading "St Louis Medical Malpractice Settlement: $900,000.00 for Spinal Cord Injury after Negligent Pain Injection " »

In April 2008, my client was a passenger on a motorcycle when the driver lost control of the bike and crashed while going around a turn. See St Louis Personal Injury Attorney Article: "Illinois Uninsured Motorcycle Accident Injury - Uninsured Coverage as a matter of Public Policy". We were able to overcome multiple factual and legal hurdles in this case and end up with an excellent result for our injured client.

First major obstacle was that our client was knocked unconscious by the motorcycle crash and the driver, in an obvious attempt to avoid the police, took her to a hospital several hours away where his mom worked as a nurse. Needless to say, the police were never contacted and an incident report was never done. This was a major problem because if the accident is not documented the insurance company will immediately claim it never happened. By the time my firm was contacted, the local Belleville police refused to take a report , claiming they cannot take a report since it had been two months since the accident.

After several months of investigation, we were able to track down the driver of the motorcycle and also identify the owner. The driver was incarcerated and refused to speak with our office. however, through the course of the case we were able to establish that the owner did not have insurance on the motorcycle, and therefore, the driver was an uninsured motorist. This allowed for the claim to be made through our client's uninsured motorist coverage through Shelter Insurance. For a discussion about uninsured (UM) and under-insured (UIM) motorist coverage, see St Louis Car Accident Lawyer article: "Missouri Underinsured and Uninsured Insurance Coverage & Which Policy Applies Mine or the Owner of the Car?"

The issue of uninsured motorist coverage was a little complicated in this case as our client was a Missouri resident and her uninsured motorist coverage was through a Missouri policy which dictated venue and choice of law in Missouri. However, it was more beneficial to have the case in Belleville Illinois, primarily because the likely jurors are more likely to be Plaintiff friendly as opposed to the Missouri venue we may have been forced to be in.

Knowing this, Shelter tried to get the case dismissed and force us to file in Missouri and in their home county, Shelter relied on the Illinois Insurance code that requires that all insurance policies "renewed, delivered, or issued for delivery in this state [Illinois]" contain a mandatory arbitration clause with respect to uninsured motorist claims. See 215 ILCS 5/143a. However, the policy was not renewed or delivered in Illinois, therefore, the mandatory arbitration did not apply; therefore we filed a Response to the Motion to Dismiss and the Judge ruled in our favor and Ordered the case to remain in Illinois by denying Shelter's motion to dismiss.

Initially, our client thought she had a total of $50,000 in Missouri UM coverage, however we were able to identify additional UM coverage through other insured vehicles and raised the UM limit to $150,000 through stacking the polices. For information about stacking UM coverage see St Louis Motorcycle Lawyer article covering Stacking: "St Louis Missouri Motorcycle Accident and Injuries - Driver Inattention and Struck Motorcyclist when Changing Lanes - Uninsured Motorist Claim"

In the end the case settled for $130,000, our client did not expect the case to be worth anywhere near that amount and was very happy with the outcome. This settlement was the result of persistent legal work and investigation to fining all possible theories of liability and insurance coverage available.

St Louis pharmacy and nurse malpractice case settles for $100,000.00. My client suffered injury to his eye, specifically his cornea, as a direct and proximate result of the improper dosage instructions given by Walgreens. Soon after retaining Missouri pharmacy malpractice lawyer, Ben Sansone; it was discovered that the injured client called Walgreens with continued complaints, which were clearly documented by the medical records, yet he was instructed to keep taking the same improper dosage of 1 drop per day. This improperly treated the eye infection which lead to injury to the eye, an injury that would have been avoided had the dosage been properly given.

The key to most Missouri injury cases related to health care malpractice, including pharmacist malpractice, is that you need a doctor to testify regarding causation and negligence. See: Proving Medical Damages in Missouri Injury Cases. Both of the victim's local St Louis Missouri treating eye doctors agreed that the corneal scar/hole was a direct result of the improper dosage that failed to clear up an eye infection. Moreover, they agreed that the injury victim had permanent vision problems that cannot be completely corrected. The vision problems include, wearing glasses only for vision correction (no contacts).

As experienced Missouri accident lawyers, we were able to gather the evidence required to settle this case quickly and before filing a lawsuit. Our client was extremely happy with the result of the case.

Personal Injury Client review:

"Mr. Sansone is a professional lawyer that will keep you abreast of every twist and turn. I have retained other attorneys over the years and Mr. Sansone ranks at the top." - Terry Watson.

Continue reading "Negligent Prescription Filling and Instructions - Missouri Pharmacy Malpractice " »

In October 2009, St Louis personal injury lawyerBen Sansone was retained by Tiffany H. to pursue a Missouri injury claim against the negligent driver's auto insurance after a rear end style collision occurring after she slowed for traffic on Highway 40 and the other driver not paying attention slammed into her vehicle.

Tiffany suffered from a minor head injury diagnosed as post concussion syndrome , additionally, she suffered from back and neck injuries requiring physical therapy and pain management.

Tiffany's medical bills totaled around $15,000 and her injuries resolved. Missouri head injury lawyer, Ben Sansone, was able to get a settlement for $75,000 by focusing on the head injury portion of the claim. Tiffany's head injury has resolved, however, experienced brain injury lawyers know how to pursue theses types of cases to secure maximum recovery, even when the head injury is relatively minor and resolves after several months.

This case demonstrates how a case that is perceived as a small injury case can be successfully pursued and settlement for a significant amount more given the proper approach and emphasis on head injury.

Our other head injury settlements:

St Louis construction worker suffers concussion - Settlement $500,000.00

Illinois driver suffers brain injury after drunk driving accident - Settlement $575,000.00

Continue reading "St Louis Auto Accident with Head Injury: Settlement obtained by Sansone Law llc" »

In February 2009 the injury law firm of Sansone Law llc was retained to represent a St Louis area pedestrian that was dragged by a drunk driver after the pedestrian attempted to assist the Missouri drunk driver who appeared passed out at his wheel in the middle of the road. See, Pedestrian and Good Samaritan Injured by Drunk Driver

See St Louis attorney Ben Sansone's other Missouri and Illinois personal injury settlements and verdicts HERE - Personal Injury Settlements and Verdicts

Continue reading "Missouri Drunk Driving Accident Lawyer Ben Sansone Obtains St Louis County Judgment of $2.3 Million" »

In October 2008 a St Louis personal injury victim and carpenter working on a St Louis Missouri residential two-story home that was under construction in St Louis County. On that same day a negligent construction worker and roofer who was an employee of St Louis based Allen Roofing & Siding was on the roof of that same residential house installing shingles.

At some point in the afternoon, while my St Louis personal injury client was walking out of the front door of the house, a negligent roofer threw a long and heavy “toe board” from the tall second story roof, that board speared my client directly in the head, giving rise to serious injuries and a St Louis Missouri personal injury claim as well as a Missouri worker's compensation claim. The toe board is heavy, 14 feet long, and consists of two 2x4s tacked together, the carpenter immediately suffered severe personal injury, collapsed to the ground in a pool of blood, and went into seizures.

See pictures below depicting the hard hat, toe board, and area of the house showing how high up the roof is.

My personal injury client suffered a severe head and neck injury, has ongoing post traumatic brain injury symptoms, and had several teeth knocked out requiring a dentist and oral surgeon. The carpenter's medical bills for treatment of his injuries are $66,070.

Allen Roofing and the roofer are liable for these injuries. The roofer negligently and recklessly tossed the toe board without any consideration for where it would land and who would be there. The carpenter was walking out the front door where a walkway path of plywood sheets was clearly marked and any reasonable person would expect people to walk on a construction site. Moreover, there were multiple other area the toe boards could have been dropped, as opposed to recklessly thrown, in the back and on the sides of the house where walkways were not established.

In addition to the claim against the roofer, my St Louis personal injury client also had a St Louis Missouri Work Comp claim as the injury sustained occurred at work. The St Louis work comp insurance carrier paid total benefits of just under $100,000.

The 3rd party personal injury claim against the roofer and his employer settled for $400,000.00 and thus a combined St Louis personal injury and worker's compensation settlement of just under $500,000.00.

St Louis Personal Injury Lawyerr Ben Sansone represents the victim of a motor vehicle and bicycle accident wherein the driver of the car failed to yield to the cyclist in a designated bicycle lane and hit him with the front end of her truck.

The St Louis bicyclist suffered from bruises and abrasions and a dislocated shoulder. He received medial treatment at the emergency room and had to undergo shoulder surgery to repair a torn labium.

The cyclist's total medical bills we about $40,000 and he missed several months of work causing about $20,000 in lost wages.

In this case, St Louis personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone was able to make claims under multiple insurance policies which allowed him to secure several settlements for the personal injury victim of the St Louis bike accident totaling in excess of $200,000.00.

Extensive experience in the Personal injury field in crucial for investigating and seeking out all potential insurance policies that may cover an injury. Oftentimes many people stop with just the first policy. CONTACT: St Louis Missouri Personal Injury Law Firm - Sansone Law at (314) 726-1817

A St Louis Missouri work comp claim we have been handling recently settled for a $245,000.00 lump sum representing the present value of approximately $750,000. Our Missouri personal injury client, the injured worker, preferred a lump sum payment as opposed to monthly payments over 25-30 years, thus the case was settled in present value as opposed to payments over many years.

This Missouri work comp claim resulted from a work place injury wherein the employee fell from a first story roof. For details see: Previous Missouri Injury Lawyer Blog Entry - Missouri Work Comp Claim

Sample of other Work Comp Settlements obtained by St Louis personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone:

$500,000.00 Settlement in Illinois Work Comp Claim - Fall from Water Tower

$32,500 - Post Traumatic Stress - Employee saw coworker die - Illinois Work Comp

$90,000 - St Louis Work Comp Claim - Broken Tibia

Jason L. Rice v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, Missouri Supreme Court - SC90139

Ambiguities in insurance policies are construed in favor of the insured, this is because the insurance company is the one who drafted the policy and any ambiguities or mistakes must favor the insurer or victim as they did not draft the policy.

In the above mentioned Missouri Supreme Court case the court ruled that a Shelter Insurance Missouri auto policy excluding and including certain amounts or policy limits for total uninsured motorist coverage was ambiguous and therefore unenforceable. In one portion of the policy it guarantees additional coverage for Missouri uninsured motorist claims and then under another provision attempts to limit it.

For the full opinion regarding ambiguous UM policy provisions see Rice v Shelter.

Debra Derousse v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Missouri Supreme Court - SC90093.

Missouri Statute requires uninsured motorist coverage to cover damages caused by owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles for "bodily injury, sickness, or disease" See Mo Statute 379.203.1

In the above Missouri Supreme Court case it was determined that mental injuries are included as the personal injury plaintiff's lawyer plead that her mental injuries were a sickness under the Statute and the Court agreed that mental injury is a sickness.

This case stemmed from a St Louis motor vehicle accident wherein a body was ejected from a car, his the Plaintiff's windshield and rolled off and came to rest just outside her door. She opened the door and saw the dead body, additionally, she knew the victim which caused even more emotional distress. her emotional distress manifested itself into physical pain, loss of sleep, depression, nightmares, etc. The full Missouri personal injury uninsured motorist opinion.

Back in early 2008 we were retained as the injury lawyers by the victim of a Belleville Illinois drunk driving crash at a major intersection. Initially, the victim retained a different personal injury law firm who secured a settlement offer of just under $50,000, however, the victim did not want to accept and the previous attorneys did not believe the case was worth more than that offer. We immediately filed a lawsuit on her behalf and eventually settled the case for the policy limits of $100,000.00.

The personal injury lawyers at Sansone Law at not looking for a quick settlement but will put all the necessary hard work into your case to make sure the absolute best result is obtained, as in the case above.

Our Missouri and Illinois personal injury law firm has handled and is currently handling many drunk driving accident cases in Missouri and Illinois. Personal injury lawyer Ben Sansone spent many years of his practice defending DWI cases and has extensive knowledge of all the tests, procedures, and facts necessary to prove the other driver was intoxicated in the civil case and thus open the defendant up to aggravated liability.

See below links of previous posts regarding the above case:

Illinois Drunk Driving Personal Injury Lawsuit

Illinois Drunk Driving Lawsuit - Complaint with Punitive Damages

The above link discusses an Illinois Complaint that includes punitive damages. In both Missouri and Illinois the rules of civil procedure require you initially file the lawsuit without punitive damages claim, gather the necessary evidence to support a punitive damages claim then file a motion for leave to amend the complaint and add punitive damages. This is technically the rule, however, it has been my experience that if you initially file the punitive damages claim by the time the defense files a motion to dismiss based on the plaintiff not obtaining leave as described above, the evidence has already been gathered and the court will grant the leave for punitive damages at the same hearing the defense is trying to get it stricken.

this is the approach I take when the evidence is overwhelming that the driver was intoxicated and we usually have evidence of a plea of guilty or a conviction prior to filing the case.