(Refer to the $160,000: Dog Bite Case) In a dog-bite case, like car accident and other personal injury cases, the magnitude of the injury is the most important evidence. While medical professionals can testify about injuries persons have sustained, nothing tells the story of an incident better than photographs. While the injured combat veteran only treated a few times after the dog-bite incident and made a full recovery within weeks, the professionals at Arnold & Smith were able to use the photographs taken of the veteran’s post-attack facial injuries to convince the property owner’s insurance company to settle for an amount that was 40-times more than the veteran’s medical bills.
(Refer to the $1.15 Million: Car Accident Case) The young man’s case illustrates why out-of-court settlements are valuable. First, the person who swerved into the young man’s lane and caused the crash was a teenager. He was driving his mother’s car. The teenager’s mother was bankrupt, and her house was in foreclosure. The bottom line is that even if the young man sued the teenager and his mother and won a $3-million judgment, he would never have collected a penny, because the teenager and his mother had no collectible assets.
More importantly, however, Arnold & Smith’s client—the young man—suffered post-traumatic stress after the accident and had trouble speaking about it. He feared having to go to court and having to testify about what happened. Through tough advocacy and out-of-court negotiation with several insurance companies, the professionals at Arnold & Smith were able to recover the full amount of all available insurance coverage, without having to go to court. Needless to say, the client was pleased with the outcome.
(Refer to the $255,000: Wrongful Death Case) Insurance coverage is one of the most important—and complicated—features of a personal injury case. When at-fault drivers have minimum coverage on their vehicles, injured persons must often look to underinsured motorist coverage from insurance policies that can legally be “stacked” together to accumulate coverage. The laws regarding insurance coverage and “stacking” are extremely complex and ever-changing.
The professionals at Arnold & Smith are on the front lines of the development of insurance coverage, advocating for the most coverage to adequately compensate innocent victims of the conduct of negligent drivers. Aside from maximizing results for individual clients, the reported appellate decisions Arnold & Smith has won on behalf of families have expanded and reinforced the rights and interests of injured persons.
(Refer to the $150,000: Car Accident Case) As in many cases, the young woman’s medical bills far exceeded the amount of available insurance coverage. The man who hit her with his truck had no collectible assets. To make matters worse, the young woman’s medical bills were paid by her health insurer under what is called an “ERISA” plan. When those kinds of health plans pay for a person’s medical treatment after a car crash, the health plans are entitled to be reimbursed. Theoretically, in a case like the young woman’s, where the medical payments made by the health plan—over $200,000—are more than the settlement amount, the health plan can take all of the money.
Fortunately, the professionals at Arnold & Smith were able to negotiate with the young woman’s health plan, convincing the plan to accept less than one-sixth of the amount it sought in reimbursement. This meant that the client—the young woman injured in the crash—walked away with over $60,000 in her pocket—instead of losing everything to her health plan.
Medical liens, ambulance liens, health plan liens, and other liens often attach to any money an injured person may recover after an accident. While the law makes it an injured person’s responsibility to pay these liens, oftentimes injured persons are not aware of this responsibility and do not know how or where to look to find out the claimed lien amounts or how to reduce them. The professionals at Arnold & Smith work with lien holders to reduce and resolve liens and to maximize the recoveries that clients obtain in accident cases.
(Refer to the $150,000: Drunk Driving Accident Case) Mixing alcohol and motor vehicles is a deadly combination. Even when an intoxicated person injured in an accident was not the driver, the person’s intoxication may provide insurance companies with opportunities to argue that the injured person was at fault for one’s own injuries. In one case, a client became drunk at a party. Through the testimony of other witnesses, the client learned that he engaged in rude behavior and eventually passed out. Afterward, his friends carried him outside and loaded him into the backseat of another friend’s vehicle. Later, the friend returned to his vehicle and attempted to drive home, but crashed on the way, killing himself and grievously injuring the client.
The insurance companies involved in the case, through their attorneys, argued that the client should receive nothing, because his own intoxication led to him being loaded into the friend’s vehicle. Or, they argued, the client lied, and he got into his friend’s vehicle to ride home, knowing his friend was drunk.
Through tough advocacy, negotiation, and in-court litigation, the professionals at Arnold & Smith were able to overcome the insurance companies’ arguments and obtain $150,000 on the client’s behalf. The client’s case underscores how alcohol can potentially damage an injured person’s case even where the injured person was not a driver.
(Refer to the $120,000: Injured Passenger Case) In a pair of cases, intoxicated vehicle owners handed their keys to friends to drive, and their friends crashed their cars, injuring them. The professionals at Arnold & Smith were able to settle the cases for $70,000 and $50,000, respectively, but not without a fight.
In North Carolina, a person who allows someone else to drive one’s car must exercise reasonable care in the choice of a driver. For example, if the person knows the driver speeds, is reckless, or is intoxicated, and hands over the keys anyway, the person will not be able to recover damages if the driver causes an accident. In fact, the person handing over one’s keys may be liable to third parties who are injured by the driver’s negligence.
Where, however, an injured person had no reason to believe a driver was reckless or intoxicated, and the person is subsequently injured in a crash in one’s own vehicle, the person can recover damages from one’s own insurance carrier. It may seem odd, but the person’s own carrier pays for the negligence of the driver the injured person chose.
NOTE: Many individuals will qualify for workers’ compensation under North Carolina’s Workers’ Compensation Act. All questions except the first discuss workers’ compensation under this state Act.
The NC Workers’ Compensation Act, adopted in the 1930s, aims to compensate employees who are injured by accidents at work and occupational disease. Workers’ comp aims to make “industry pay for its own wreckage,” in the words of the court. It strikes a balance between employers and their employees.
If you are injured on the job, in most cases you may be entitled to make a claim for workers’ compensation insurance benefits. Depending on your employer, you may need to file a federal or state claim for workers’ compensation. If you are a veteran, there are further resources available to help you file your claim.
If you are not sure whether you have a claim or not: The experienced workers’ compensation attorneys at Arnold & Smith, PLLC are ready to step in to help ensure that you do not miss out on a claim you might not think is covered. Our attorneys handle the stress and worry of dealing with your employer, the insurance company and the North Carolina Industrial Commission. Mr. Arnold is experienced in handling injury claims, having formerly worked as an insurance defense attorney handling injury claims for insurance companies.