Take the recent case of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Jakubowicz. This was an Indiana Supreme Court case in which the insurer’s underinsured motorist policy contained conflicting requirements. On one hand, insureds were required to file their UIM claim within three years. On the other hand, insureds could not first file a UIM claim unless and until they had exhausted the insurance coverage of the at-fault underinsured motorist. There was no mention of how to proceed if the insurance coverage of the at-fault motorist hadn’t been exhausted by the time that three-year time clock was up.

When the terms of an auto insurance policy are ambiguous, claims can sometimes be negotiated fairly out-of-court with the help of an experienced attorney. However, there are many situations in which the insurer is not going to be satisfied to do that. Your car accident lawyer has to be prepared to take the case to court and fight, if need be. 

In the Jakubowiczs case, plaintiff and her two sons were seriously injured in a car accident with an underinsured driver.

For those not familiar, an underinsured driver is one who does have insurance coverage, but it is not enough to cover the full extent of damages suffered by the person injured. This is common, as some of the most serious auto collisions can result in hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, property damage and lost wages and loss of future earnings.

The statute of limitations on personal injury claims in Indiana is three years (it’s four in Florida). Plaintiff filed her claim against the at-fault driver one year after the car accident, seeking damages for medical expenses and property damage on behalf of herself and her sons.

Just shy of three years, she notified the insurance company she planned to file an underinsured motorist claim. However, it wasn’t until after that three-year mark that she formally filed a motion for leave to amend her complaint to include her own insurer and a claim for underinsured motorist coverage.

Trial court granted her leave, but the insurer soon thereafter moved for summary judgment, arguing the three-year time limit – per the language of the policy – was up and she had waited to long to file her UIM claim.

Plaintiff opposed that motion, arguing she didn’t have a choice but to wait because she hadn’t yet exhausted the UIM driver’s auto insurance coverage.

Trial court denied the insurer’s motion for summary judgment. The appellate court reversed. The case went to the state supreme court, which reinstated the ruling of the trial court.

In its finding, the state supreme court ruled that while insurers are free to limit the coverage in their policies, those limitations have to be clearly expressed in order to be enforceable, and they can’t be in conflict with other provisions of the contract. Where provisions that limit coverage aren’t plainly and clearly expressed, the policy is going to be construed most favorably to the insured – and that’s what happened here.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Jakubowicz, July 26, 2016, Miami Car Accident Lawyer Blog

More Blog Entries:

Florida Jury Awards $42 Million to Quadriplegic Man in DUI Case, July 30, 2016, Miami Car Accident Attorney Blog

Motorcyclists account for almost 20 percent of all auto accident deaths in Florida, even though they only account for 3 percent of all the registered vehicles in the state.

Also troubling is the fact that, according to a recent survey conducted by AAA Consumer Pulse, almost 1 in 6 motorcyclists forego motorcycle insurance. When you consider that the average economic cost of each motorcycle death, per the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is nearly $1.5 million, we’re talking serious losses not only to individual families, but to communities at-large. That $1.5 million figure factors in medical bills, legal expenses, lost productivity, emergency medical services, insurance bills, workplace losses and property damage. 

Our Miami motorcycle accident lawyers know the issue of required motorcycle helmets is a sensitive one within the riding community. One-third of motorcycle riders surveyed strongly believe they should not be forced to wear a helmet when riding. It’s considered a deeply personal choice, and certainly, it is not one that is going to affect the amount of compensation the rider or surviving family members receive in the event of negligence. However, it’s worth pointing out, as the AAA public policy manager did, that motorcycle fatalities in Florida have more than doubled since the state repealed its law requiring all riders to wear approved helmets.

The NHTSA reports helmets are 37 percent effective in preventing motorcycle deaths. So in Florida, let’s take the 554 motorcycle accident deaths that happened last year. If we assumed that every single one of those riders was not wearing a helmet (which is not the case, but for the sake of argument), that would mean 205 of them would have survived.

The issue of insurance is also an important one to address because too often, motorcyclists are victims of hit-and-run accidents. In those situations, the only way to recover any sort of compensation is with uninsured motorist coverage. Alternatively, if a motorcyclist is struck by a driver who has insurance but not enough to cover the rider’s losses (and motorcyclists tend to suffer more severe injuries than those inside passenger cars), the only other way to recover is with underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage.

Our personal injury lawyers fight hard to obtain the highest level of compensation for our clients, but we can’t help you recover damages from insurance policies that don’t exist. It is so important to maintain adequate insurance, and we usually recommend keeping more than the bare minimum.

This goes not just for Florida residents but all riders planning to travel to Florida at some point this year. That AAA Consumer Pulse study asked riders across the country which motorcycle rallies/ events they plan to attend this year. Of those who responded, 70 percent answered Daytona Bike Week, which runs in March, and 57 percent answered Biketoberfest, also in Daytona.The third most popular was Leesburg Bikefest, to which 27 percent said they planned to attend.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

Florida motorcycle fatalities rise 23% last year, May 25, 2016, By Chris Parenteau, New 4 Jax

More Blog Entries:

Texting With a Driver? You Could be Liable. May 23, 2016, Miami Motorcycle Accident Lawyer Blog

The tragic auto accident, which occurred in March 2015 at the intersection of State Road 78 and U.S. 27 in Glades County, was the subject of a year-long investigation and a number of changes to the intersection where the crash occurred. The conclusions of the report help to clarify the avenues of financial recovery victims may have.

All the people aboard the bus were from Fort Pierce and belonged to the Independent Haitian Assembly of God Church and were returning from a Palm Sunday celebration with a sister church in Fort Myers.

Local investigators determined early on that the 58-year-old van driver breezed through a stop sign, apparently not seeing it, before tearing across the four-lane highway and careening off the road and nosediving into a steep embankment before landing in a canal. The driver – one of only two people wearing a seat belt in the van – did not survive. Of the 10 who survived, all – including a four-year-old girl – were seriously injured. 

There were no other witnesses to the crash. In fact, the only reason help arrived was because one of the passengers was able to stagger to the roadside and flag a passing vehicle to call police.

Investigators also knew fairly quickly that the van was rated for safely carrying 15 people, and yet was carrying 18. A 2004 report by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) revealed car accidents involving these 15-passenger vans were more likely to be deadly due to the risk of rollover. That didn’t happen in this case, but investigators did learn the van was not properly equipped with seat belts, as the law requires.

The driver had an active class B commercial driver’s license good through 2019, had been medically cleared by his doctor per annual state requirements and appeared to be in good health. He was also familiar with this particular route. As far as his driving safety history, he had been cited for speeding three times in his driving history, the most recent in 2010, and he had a citation for careless driving in 2004.

As far as the van itself, there were no notable mechanical problems.

The intersection was equipped with all the legally required signage, though the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) did end up making some changes after the crash, per recommendations made by the NTSB. Those included: A larger stop sign, a flashing “stop ahead” sign, rumble strips and reflective markers along the canal.

As far as liability, it’s tough to know without having in-depth knowledge of all the details, but in general, we can say potential parties in this case might include:

• The estate of the driver/ driver’s insurer
• The church/ church’s insurer (both as owner of the van and employer of the driver)
• Victims’ underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier

In other situations, we might recommend exploring whether the manufacturer could be held liable for a defect and also the government agency responsible for road maintenance, but neither of those appear to have been an issue in this case.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040. 

Additional Resources:

Fatal Glades County Van Crash Report Released, April 12, 2016, By Michael Braun, News-Press

More Blog Entries:

Facts About Florida Car Accidents, April 8, 2016, Miami Car Accident Attorney Blog

These kind of policies don’t provide near the protection that standard policies provide.  And they affect you in ways that you might not imagine.

Recently, we represented a woman who was estranged from her husband.  After they got back together, they were driving on a road trip.  Because she was getting tired, she let her husband driver her car.  While the husband was driving, they were in a serious wreck caused by an underinsured driver.

We settled the claim against the other driver and then pursued a claim against her underinsured driver coverage.  But the UIM carrier denied the claim because the husband, who was estranged when the policy was purchased, was specifically excluded under the policy.  Even though who was driving made no difference in whether the wreck would occur or how it occurred, the fact that the driver was excluded deprived my client of her needed benefits.

When you’re purchasing your insurance, make sure you understand the true implications of potentially excluded drivers.