Check out the latest Kennett Square Car Accident Client Testimonial from a Car Accident victim helped by lawyer Tim Rayne:
I Don’t Believe in Personal Injury Lawsuits, But….
As a Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer who helps car accident victims receive fair treatment from insurance companies, it’s very common for me to hear potential clients say to me in our first meeting somthing to the effect of “I don’t believe in Personal Injury lawsuits, but…..” or “I don’t believe in suing people, but….”
Lately I’ve been thinking, why is there a stigma about Personal Injury lawsuits? Why do people feel guilty about talking to a Car Accident Lawyer after being injured in an accident caused by another driver? Why do people believe that making a claim for compensation is a bad thing?
Why the Guilt about Personal Injury Claims?
I came up with a few ideas as to why people feel guilty about making Personal Injury Claims.
The first is that some personal injury lawyers contribute to the stigma by producing and airing cheesey TV commercials promising “large cash awards” if you’ve been injured in a car accident. These tacky ads create negaive feelings about injury claims and Personal Injury Attorneys. I don’t do TV ads and wish my fellow injury lawyers would stop.
Insurance companies and politicians have also contributed to the stigma by launching campaigns to promote Tort Reform and caps on money damage awards, making it seem like an injured person is being greedy for pursuing compensation after being injured in an accident. Insurance companies have an obvious motive, to reduce claims and increase profits, and politicians receive campaign contributions from insurance companies.
There’s also a certain amount of guilt that naturally arises when we think about the adversarial process of making a legal claim against somebody else.
My thought on the guilt is that it’s natural, but not really logical. The reality is that you are only following Pennsylvania Law by making a claim AND the claim will be paid by an Insurance Company, not the person who caused the accident.
Pennsylvania Law Supports Personal Injury Claims for a Good Reason
If you’ve suffered actual injuries and damages because another person broke a safety rule and caused an accident, Pennsylvania Law provides that you have a legal right to compensation. If someone was driving too fast and rear-ended you, or ran a red light, or was texting while driving and crashed into you, Pennsylania law provides that they were Negligent and they owe you fair compensation to make up for your injuries and damages.
Compensation allowed under Pennsylvania law includes money for your lost wages, medical bills, out-of-pocket expenses and money to make up for your pain and the negative impact of the accident on your life and activities.
There is a good reason why Pennsylvania has this system of compensation. If it did not, people might resort to extortion or even violence to get compensation after an accident rather than deal with the matter in the insurance claim process or in court.
An Insurance Company, Not the Other Driver, Will Pay Your Claim
The other important fact to undersand when considering a claim for compensation after a Pennsylvania car accident is that although technically the claim is against the driver who caused the accident, in reality, the claim will be defended and paid by the driver’s insurance company.
The claim will, no doubt, impact the responsible driver’s insurance rates (which it should because the driver broke the law and cause an injury). However, the driver’s insurance company has a contractual obligation to defend the driver and pay your claim up to the amount of liability coverage that the driver bought. So, unless you choose to make a claim for personal assets, the responsible driver will not be bankrupted by the claim.
In addition to representing injured people and advocating and fighting for fair compensationfor accident victims, I’ve also made it a mission of my law practice to educate people on insurance and legal issues and try to eliminate the negative feelings about personal injury lawyers and lawsuits. Hopefully this Post helped….
For over 20 years, Tim Rayne has been helping injured victims of Pennsylvania Car Accidents understand their legal rights and the insurance claim process and receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester Pennsylvania. Tim has extensive experience negotiating settlements with large car insurance companies (Allstate, State Farm, USAA, GEICO, Nationwide, Progressive) and regularly tries car accident cases in court. For a Free Evaluation of your Pennsylvania Car Accident case, contact Tim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com.
What to Consider When Hiring a Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer
Any licensed Pennsylvania lawyer can claim to be qualified to handle your car accident claim, but how do you know if you are hiring the right lawyer to represent you? A car accident causing injuries can be a significant life event and may cause long term ramifications. Because of this, it’s important to have an experienced and qualified Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer represent you in your fight against the other driver and the insurance companies.
Even if you’ve been referred to a lawyer to handle your car accident case, here are some factors to consider before retaining that lawyer:
Factors to Consider Before Hiring a Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer
FOCUS – Does the lawyer you are considering practice areas other than Personal Injury Law or focus in that area exclusively? Nowadays it can be risky to have a general practitioner or an attorney who handles many types of cases represent you in your Pennsylvania car accident claim. The laws are constantly changing and having a lawyer who regularly deals with the same insurance adjusters and defense lawyers can be advantageous.
EXPERIENCE – How long has the lawyer you are considering been practicing Personal Injury Law? Does the lawyer have significant experience in negotiating car accident settlements with all of the Big Insurance Companies like Allstate, State Farm, Nationwide, Progressive, GEICO, Erie, Safe Auto, Travelers, The Hartford, USAA…..? Does he or she regularly take car accident cases to trial or just settle all of them with the insurance companies? Is he or she Board Certified based on trial experience?
RESULTS – Does the lawyer you are considering have a track record of success in settling and trying Pennsylvania car accident cases?
REVIEWS – Does the lawyer have positive reviews on the Web? Is he or she 10.0 rated as a Superb Attorney by AVVO.com? Is he or she AV Rated by Martindale Hubbell for legal skill and ethics? Has he or she been named a Super Lawyer and Top 100 Lawyer in Pennsylvania? Having a lawyer with positive Reviews and Ratings does not guarantee a positive experience in your case, but probably makes it more likely.
Tim Rayne is a Chester County Pennsylvania Car Accident Lawyer with the law firm MacElree Harvey, Ltd. Tim has offices in Kennett Square and West Chester. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of car accidents receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Tim educates his clients on the insurance claim and legal process and fights for fair compensation through settlement or trial. Tim is Board Certified in Civil Trial Advocacy and has numerous awards and distinctions. However, Tim is most proud of the Testimonial Videos from satisfied clients on his website. Contact Tim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com for more information on how he can help you after a Pennsylvania Car Accident.
How Much of the $55 Million Jury Verdict Will Erin Andrews Receive?
The Jury in the Erin Andrews peep hole video case against Michael Barrett and the Nashville Marriott reached an epic Verdict of $55 Million. Now we’ll have to see if the Verdict withstands possible appeal and how much Andrews can collect.
Challenging the Verdict
The defendants may choose to challenge the Verdict on appeal. There are two possible avenues in the appeal. First, the defendants could seek to have the whole verdict tossed and obtain a new trial by proving that the judge made errors in the case that made the trial unfair and warrant a new trial.
In the alternative, the defendants could see a remittitur, or reduction, of the verdict by the appellate court by arguing that the amount of the verdict “shocks the conscience.” Generally, jury verdicts are entitled to some degree of deference because the jury heard the evidence and is entitled to use its discretion in awarding compensation. However, if the verdict is so high as to shock the conscience of the appellate court, it can be reduced to a more “reasonable” figure.
Verdict Collection Issues
Even if the $55 Million Verdict is not challenged on appeal or stands after an appeal, Erin Andrews and her lawyers will face challenges collecting the whole verdict.
Tennessee, the state where the case was tried, apportions payment of the verdict based on percentages of responsibility. In the Erin Andrews case, Michael Barrett was found 51% responsible and the Nashville Marriott 49%. So, Erin has to try to collect 51% from Barrett and 49% from Marriott.
Any insurance coverage Barrett might have would certainly exclude coverage for his intentional and criminal actions. Accordingly, unless Barrett hits the Powerball, the portion of the verdict chargeable to him, about $28 Million, is almost certainly never going to be collected. (Remember when the Goldman Family got its $33.5 Million verdict against OJ Simpson arising out of Ronald Goldman’s murder? The Goldman family never collected…..)
With regard to the 49% allocated to Marriott, that $27 Million may be collectible. Although I keep saying Marriot, the actual entity that ran the hotel was a local franchise. It’s likely that the franchise owner has a big insurance policy, but probably not $27 Million. So, to collect on the entire amount the attorneys will have to locate assets to be sold to collect.
Possible Settlement
There is another possible scenario. In order for Andrews and her lawyers to avoid the delay and risk of an appeal reducing the verdict and in order for Marriot to avoid the risk of being saddled with such a huge verdict, the parties could agree to a Settlement whereby Marriott would agree to pay and Andrews would agree to accept some compromised amount.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens……
Attorney Fees, Costs and Taxes
Once the Verdict or Settlement is paid, Andrews will have to pay her lawyers their fees and costs and then pay the IRS and state tax authorities their cut.
It’s almost certain that Andrews’ attorneys are charging a Contingent Fee, which means that rather than Andrews paying them their hourly rates during the litigation, they will receive a percentage of the recovery, usually between one-third and forty percent, plus their litigation costs, from any monies that are collected. That figure seems huge now, but remember the fee was Contingent on winning and this is a case that could have been lost. Also, understand that Andrews’ lawyers invested thousands of hours into the litigation which would have cost her millions in fees if she had paid them by the hour.
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Personal Injury Lawyer practicing in West Chester and Kennett Square, Pennsylvania. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured victims of accidents receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Contact Tim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com.
Why Did the Jury Award So Much Money to Erin Andrews?
Fifty Five Million Dollars, a whole lot of money. That’s how much the Jury verdict was in the case of Erin Andrews versus Michael Barrett and the Nashville Marriot. But why so high? How did the Jury come up with such a huge number?
According to reports from a few of the Jurors, some wanted to give what Erin’s attorneys asked for, $75 Million, and others thought that around $10 Million would be plenty. In the end, the Jury compromised at $55 Million.
Here are five reasons why I think the verdict was so high:
The Offensive Nature of the Invasion – Clearly the violation itself drove up the amount of the verdict. Private post shower naked moments of an attractive woman being taped and then published on the Internet for anyone to view for all eternity. This was particularly offensive and something that would get a Jury’s attention and could lead to a large verdict.
The Number of Views – The video had been viewed 16.2 million times at the start of the trial and Erin’s experts predicted that it would be continued to be viewed at a clip of about 600,000 more per year. Erin’s attorneys used those numbers masterfully in his closing, suggesting that the Jury “do the math” and consider awarding a dollar or even five dollars for each view.
Had this case been tried in Pennsylvania such arguments would not have been permissible because, believe it or not, lawyers are not allowed to suggest a specific dollar figure for compensation.
The Proof of Physical and Emotional Harm – Erin herself, her parents and expert witnesses gave powerful testimony about the physical and emotional damage suffered by Erin from the publishing of the video.
Sending a Message to the Hotel Industry about the Importance of Privacy and Safety – Erin’s attorneys told the Jury that the amount of the verdict would set the price for privacy and safety and that it was important for them to show Marriott and other hotels that they must follow proper procedures to keep guests safe. It appears that the jury deemed it proper to send a message.
Failure to Accept Responsibility and Blaming the Victim – Rather than settle the case before verdict or accept some responsibility for the incident, Marriott’s lawyers took an aggressive tact in defending the case. They attempted to blame solely Barrett for the incident and refused to admit that they had any responsibility. In addition, the lawyers claimed that since Erin continued to work for ESPN and do well financially, her harm was not that great. This aggressive stance certainly backfired and likely helped to drive the massive $55 Million verdict.
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Personal Injury Lawyer with the Chester County Law Firm MacElree Harvey. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured accident victims in Pennsylvania receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Contact Tim for a Free Evaluation of your Personal Injury Claim at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com.
Erin Andrews $55 Million Verdict Highlights Negligence Law Applicable to Hotels
The Jury in the Erin Andrews negligence case against Marriott Hotels has just rendered its verdict, finding Marriott negligent and responsible for Erin Andrew’s injuries arising out of the peep hole video and awarding compensatory damages of $55 Million.
This high profile lawsuit arose out of a horrible criminal act committed in 2008 when Michael Barrett was able to book an adjoining room to famous ESPN sports reporter Erin Andrews in the Nashville Marriott and then unscrewed the peep hole in the door adjoining the two rooms. This allowed Barrett to film Andrew’s intimate post-shower moments which he eventually uploaded onto the internet. The peep hole video has been viewed over 16 million times and continues to generate heavy traffic which Andrews alleges has caused her great physical and emotional trauma.
Barrett was criminally prosecuted for his actions and went to jail for his crime. Nevertheless, because what makes it on to the internet can never truly be deleted, the product of his crime, the peep hole video, has remained easily accessible to anyone with a computer.
Andrews filed a civil suit against both Barrett and the entity operating the Nashville Marriott.
The Complaint against Marriott alleges that it was Negligent for failing to protect Andrews’ safety and privacy. As a guest of the hotel, Andrews asserted multiple safety violations including: disclosing to Barrett the fact that Andrews was staying in the hotel; allowing Barrett to book an adjacent room to Andrews without checking with her first; and failing to properly maintain the peep holes to prevent tampering.
The law in Tennessee, like the law in Pennsylvania, provides that the Marriott owed a Duty of Care to its hotel patrons to act reasonably and to protect them from harm. This Duty of Care also included an obligation to warn and/or protect Andrews from foreseeable harm from other people in the hotel.
Experts for both sides testified about security obligations and activities of the Marriott and, ultimately, the Jury found that Marriott was Negligent.
The Jury apportioned the responsibility for the incident 51% to Barrett and 49% to Marriott which means that Andrews can only recover 49% of the $55 million from Marriott which is about $26 million.
Because these Negligence principles also apply in Pennsylvania, if you or a loved one is injured in a hotel, store, restaurant, bar or other establishment as a result of the Negligent or even criminal actions of a third party like Michael Barrett in the Erin Andrews case, you may have legal claims for fair compensation.
Tim Rayne is a Pennsylvania Personal Injury Lawyer with the Chester County Law Firm MacElree Harvey. Tim has law offices in West Chester and Kennett Square, Pennsylvania. For over 20 years, Tim has been helping injured accident victims receive fair treatment from insurance companies. Contact Tim Rayne at 610 840 0124 or trayne@macelree.com for a Free Evaluation of your Pennsylvania Personal Injury or Wrongful Death Case.