This case argues that Snyder, Attorney for the Reliance Insurance Company, assisted and participated in a tort against Hi-Health and its owner Mr. Chalpin, when the company refused to cover a driver-at-fault accident involving Mr. Chalpin’s daughter. Mr. Chalpin’s daughter was covered under the company policy as an occasional employee.

Two additional points of note are that 1) Reliance initially accepted the claim, and 2) Snyder initially held that the claim was valid. It was not until the claim exceeded a five million dollar expense that Reliance sought to disallow the claim. In fact, Snyder advised Reliance Insurance to sue their insured, Mr. Chalpin as a means of minimizing the value of the policy and thus reducing the acceptable settlement amount in the accident claim.

Two courts dismissed motions for summary judgment filed by Hi-Health and allowed the case to go to trial. Their reason was that the evidence as presented raised a credibility issue that was best decided by jury.

The subsequent appeal noted that the credibility issue would not have been present if Snyder had addressed the points of the suit in the motion. In short, Hi-Health claimed that Snyder knew that Reliance had improperly revisited its original decision to cover Mr. Chalpin’s daughter only after it realized the amount of exposure the company would suffer and that the subsequent suit was in fact an effort to shift its losses.

The court noted that Reliance failed to avail itself of a number of alternatives when issuing the original coverage, including modified coverage and deeper initial investigation of the person covered. The fact that Snyder was aware of these options, and initially held that the coverage was legitimate, was Snyder’s undoing.

Under general rule, “a lawyer is subject to liability to a client or non-client when a non-lawyer would be in similar circumstance.” Moreover, “when a lawyer advises or assists a client in acts that subject the civil liability to others, those others may seek to hold the lawyer liable along with or instead of the client.” (Paragraph 45 of the ruling) Thus, the court held that Snyder, due to active involvement in the misdirection of the case and its subsequent motions, was indeed liable and that aiding and abetting was a valid cause of action.

The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s orders dismissing the aiding and abetting claims and granted summary judgment of the malicious prosecution claim.

Ironically, if Reliance Insurance had authorized the original settlement amount, consistent with the coverage obtained by the policyholder, this case would never have gone to trial.

PIP is a guaranteed health insurance policy for a person who is injured in an automobile accident. When a person is injured in an automobile accident if they do not have regular health insurance, but they have PIP insurance, they are guaranteed $10,000 of  health insurance less what ever deductible they have chosen. In other words, the person injured is guaranteed $10,000 worth of health benefits. If they have a $1,000 deductible for example, the first $1,000 of medical bills is their responsibility.

PIP pays 80% of your reasonable and necessary medical bills. The PIP law just changed, so there are Medicare fee schedules that PIP pays 80% of those schedules. For example, if there is a charge for $100, Medicare's fee schedule would be $80. Eighty percent of the first bill would get applied to the deductible. When the deductible is met, PIP then pays 80% of those next  bills, up to $10,000.  One of the benefits  of PIP is that it gives the injured person in an accident, $10,000 of  insurance for their medical bills. It is also the law in Florida as the minimum requirement to operate a vehicle. In the State of Florida, you must have PIP and Property damage insurance.

Is it always the $10,000 limit?
Yes. I have seen on occasion, extended PIP, but those would be associated with out of state policies. I have not seen extended PIP on a Florida policy.

What is the deductible for PIP?
You can manipulate your deductible, meaning you have options too choose from, which includes:  no deductible, $500 deductible or $1,000 deductible.

According to the Florida statute, it states that the Insurance company shall pay Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits for and there are four scenarios.

The first scenario is: Accidental Bodily Injury sustained in Florida by the owner, while occupying a motor vehicle. Or while not the occupant of a self propelled vehicle, if the injury is caused by physical contact with a motor vehicle. An example of this is if the injured person was a pedestrian or on a bicycle.

The second scenario that an insurance Company will pay Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits is for accidental bodily injuries sustained outside of the State of Florida but within the United States by the owner, while occupying the owner's motor vehicle. Meaning the owner has to be in his/her own motor vehicle that is insured. He can't be in a friend's motor vehicle.

The third scenario where an insurance company will pay Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits is for accidental bodily injuries sustained by a relative of the owner who resides in the same household of the insured. This is called the relative resident rule under the Florida statute for PIP. Under any of the circumstances just described. Meaning injury in the state, while occupying the motor vehicle or caused by the motor vehicle, or  if it is outside of the state of Florida, if that person was occupying the owner's motor vehicle. This extends to resident relatives, for example, if I am married and I own a vehicle, but my wife does not and my wife is a passenger in my car and gets injured, she is entitled to PIP under my policy, because she is a resident relative. The definition of a resident  relative, means the person is a relative by blood or marriage and lives in the same household. If it is a non-married, significant other, such as a boyfriend or girlfriend, the person does not qualify as a resident relative.

The fourth scenario where an insurance company will pay Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits is for accidental bodily injuries sustained in this state by any other person while occupying the owner's motor vehicle. An example of this would be if I have a friend who is in my vehicle, and that friend does not own a vehicle of his/her own, nor does he/she live with a resident relative, then he can get PIP benefits through my policy. This applies to any friend driving the car of a person with PIP.

Does PIP pay for lost wages if I am in an accident?
Yes, Personal Injury Protection (PIP) Insurance pays 60% of lost wages. Typically the insurance companies will see what your current job at the time of the automobile accident was and they will pay 60% of those current wages.

Does PIP cover death benefits?
Yes, this was just enacted through the Florida Legislature as a part of the PIP benefits. If someone dies as a result of an automobile accident, PIP will pay $5,000 of death benefits. This was legislated when the PIP statute was put into effect.

When is PIP required in Florida?
The law in Florida says that if you have a vehicle in Florida for more than 90 days, you must have the vehicle registered and you have to comply with the law of the State of Florida.

How is PIP different from Property Damage Insurance?
PIP is Personal Injury Protection, it pays for personal injuries. Property Damage Insurance pays for property damage. When you have PIP (Personal Injury Protection) Insurance, this pays for your medical bills, regardless of who is at fault in the accident. Property Damage Insurance, pays for the other person's vehicle, if you damage the other person's vehicle. An example of this is if I get into an auto accident with you, regardless of who is at fault, PIP pays for my medical expenses and your PIP pays for your medical expenses. If the accident, was my my fault, my Property Damage Insurance, is what you would use to pay for the repairs on your vehicle.
 
I hope that I have given our readers the fundamentals of the ABC's of PIP. If you have any questions, please drop me line and let me know.  

Carl J. Wald, Esq.
 

The consumer rights organization, American Association of Justice, released the comprehensive report, The Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America: How They Raise Premiums, Deny Claims, and Refuse Insurance to Those Who Need It Most." This report highlights 10 of the worst insurance companies for consumers based criteria such as, SEC and FBI records, testimony from former insurance agents and adjusters, court documents and more. 

The report ends with making a call for "Pro-Consumer Insurance Reforms" and making a suggestion for the following three points:

1. Require Insurers to Work in Good Faith

2. Require Prior Approval of Rate Increases 

3. Establish an Insurance Consumer Advocate

The remainder of the top 10 list of worst insurance companies for consumers is rounded out by the following:

1. UNUM, - Disability Insurance, Life insurance, supplemental and accident insurance
2. AIG,  - Auto insurance, life insurance, accident and health insurance,  property and casualty
3. State Farm, - Auto, life, health, home owners insurance and health insurance
4. Conseco, - Health Insurance, Life Insurance and Annuities
5. WellPoint, - Health benefits Company
6. Farmers Insurance  - Auto, Life and Homeowners Insurance
7. UnitedHealth, - Health care Insurance
8. Torchmark, - Holding Company offering life and supplemental health insurance
9. Liberty Mutual - Auto, Life, Homeowners and Commercial Insurance.

Over the past 16 years, I have handled thousands of Personal Injury cases against several of the companies on this list and a host of others.  I can attest firsthand that some companies are better than others at handling claims for their Insured and helping the needs of the injured.

I find it no surprise that Allstate made the top of the list, nor am I not surprised by the findings of the report: The Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America". I do find it strange however, that the insurance companies are so quick to harm and work against the interest of their own insured clients.

Randy David, blogger for Gotcha Covered, wrote the post Is Allstate the Worst Insurer in America? He added to the discussion that "the designation is not surprising, given the ongoing war between the insurer and trial lawyers over auto insurance accident claims." 

David Gottlieb, blogger for No Fault Paradise, wrote the post, Top Ten Insurance worst Insurance Companies for Consumers.  He has some pretty interesting comments on his blog regarding the post.  Great discussions on the subject of the insurance industry and how premiums are increasing at an alarming rate faster than the incurred losses for the Insurance carriers.

John Day, blogger for Day on Torts, wrote the post, Ten Worst Insurance Companies in America and listed the top 10 Insurance companies that were in the AAJ report.

I look forward to see how the Insurance Companies and the public respond to this AAJ report on their industry that outlines how consistently they put profits over their policyholders.

 After reading the AAJ report, I would love to hear from consumers on how they feel their insurance company is treating them.  Has the report made you think differently about your provider?

I welcome comments...

On the opposite side of  the argument, the release of the documents by Allstate can be viewed as  Allstate's way of showing that they have nothing to hide. Undoubtedly, the Mckinsey documents issue will not go away for awhile, in light of the looming release of the new tell all book for the public by New Mexico attorney David Berardinelli, called "From Good Hands to Boxing Gloves: The Dark Side of Insurance."

An Allstate spokesperson, Rich Halberg, downplays the significance of the documents in a recent  Allstate press release, "When aired in the unbiased setting of a court of law, allegations about the documents have been shown to be without merit. Most recently, some of the documents were seen and explained in context to a jury during a two-week trial in Kentucky (Hager v. Allstate)."

The Hager v. Allstate case involved a rear-end automobile accident case that occurred in 1997. The Plaintiff, a 60 year old accident victim, sued Allstate for not paying claims related to the personal injury in the car accident and for allegedly violating Kentucky's Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act. The outcome of the two week trial was for the Defendant, Allstate. According to several published reports, the jury came back with this verdict after deliberating for a short while. One can only wonder if the Jury took the Plaintiff seriously for asking for $1.425 Billion for what is typically referred to as a soft tissue injury.

Click here to view the extensive site of the Allstate "Claim Review" documents.  The site shares comprehensive information on Casualty Review, Homeowners Review, Auto Physical Damage Review and Field work Information.

We encourage the public to read the documents and let us know your opinion of the documents.

In yesterday's release isued by Florida's Highway Safety and Motor Vehicle department, the following paragraph caught my eye: "Law enforcement, including the Florida Highway Patrol, will be checking proof of insurance roadside and could issue a citation for failing to carry the proper insurance. We are encouraging all motorists to make sure their vehicle is properly insured. If you have questions please contact your insurance carrier/agent to make sure you have the required Personal Injury Protection coverage." 

This is a strong warning that the department is taking this new law seriously.  Please do not get caught without this mandatory PIP Insurance.  If you do not have PIP effective January 1, 2008, your  insurance carrier will cancel your policy and inform the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, who will then suspend your driver’s license and registration. This could be an expensive endeavor to get your license reinstated, fees range from $150 up to $500.

We encourage you to be proactive and make the call to your insurance Agent today to make sure that you are carrying the mandatory PIP coverage January 1, 2008. It can save you money and headaches in the future. I called my Insurance Agent today just to be on the safe side. They reminded me that I took care of this already and not to worry.  I told them, I wanted to make sure one last time, you can never be too sure, with something so important.

To read more from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, click Here. 

Effective January 1, 2008 - Florida law requires drivers to carry personal injury protection insurance.

You will be receiving a mandatory PIP reminder from your insurance company reminding you of this change.  A word of caution, don't get caught without PIP coverage.  Call your local insurance person and reinstate this mandatory coverage, so you will not forget.

The Florida Insurance Council wants you to know the following about PIP insurance coverage:

• Beginning on Jan. 1, 2008, Florida law requires drivers to maintain PIP insurance coverage which pays covered medical expenses for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle crash by the policyholder, passengers, and relatives residing in the policyholder's household.

•If a policyholder fails to maintain PIP coverage, the State of Florida may suspend the policyholder's driver's license and vehicle registration.

•If a policyholder already has personal injury protection coverage, the coverage will be amended effective Jan. 1, to incorporate legally required changes without any additional premium and that the policyholder need take no further action.

For more information on the Florida PIP Insurance coverage see The Insurance Journal and the Florida Insurance Council White Paper "The Return of Automobile Personal Injury Protection." . (Site Registration required) 

Don't wait, Renew your PIP coverage today.

Vanessa  Fuhrmans brings out startling revelations that most people do not know about their medical providers and how they can be in for a rude awakening, if they use their personal health insurance for injuries sustained in a personal injury accident, should their insurance company decide to come after them for reimbursement.  According to the article, some company health plans, reserve the right to recoup the medical expenses it paid for someone's treatment if the person also collects damages in an injury suit. This is becoming a growing trend around the country, as more employer health plan law suits are materializing.

Insurance Companies and large Corporations try to portray Trial Lawyers, especially Personal Injury lawyers as greedy individuals only after the almighty dollar. They should take a look in the mirror and and feel ashamed of themselves. After reading this article, I have a new admiration for good personal injury lawyers around the country that stand up and fight valiantly for justice for the average citizen.

Personal Injury Lawyers, stand up and take a bow for not backing down to these immoral, greedy and money hungry insurance companies and corporations that only care about large profits and finding new ways to exploit the little person.

Click here to read the WSJ Article Employers grab accident victims' cash on MSN.com

Jason Pease, a sergeant in the Lincoln County’s (Maine) Sheriff’s Office, had a regular take home car.  While off duty on Christmas night in 2002, Sergeant Pease responded to a dispatch call to resolve a disturbance. When he arrived, Sergeant Pease found Michael Montagana causing the problem. Mr. Montagana claimed that he had been drugged and that people were out to get him. Sergeant Pease tried to control the situation but at some point Mr. Montagana ran to the Sergeant's car, got in, and tried to drive away. Sergeant Pease attempted to stop Mr. Montagana and was run over.  As a result, Sergeant Pease suffered severe injuries.

What happened next is disconcerting:

• The Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office had elected not to buy Uninsured Motorist (UM) coverage to protect its officers.

• The Sheriff’s Office did have Workers Compensation coverage, but it did not adequately provide for Sergeant Pease's condition.

• Sergeant Pease had personal UM coverage through State Farm. 

• State Farm built into its UM coverage an exclusion for vehicles “furnished for [your] regular use”.  According to State Farm, Sergeant Pease was left without a remedy since Sergeant Payne was regularly allowed to take his police car home. The Maine Supreme Court, fortunately, found that once the car was stolen it was no longer supplied for his regular use, and therefore Sergeant Pease’s exclusion did not apply.

What is perhaps most interesting about this decision is that it is not the argument made by the Sergeant's attorneys. Instead, the main Supreme Court reached this conclusion on its own. This decision follows ruling from several other states finding UM coverage for people injured by a thief or carjacker, who had stolen the insured’s own vehicle. 

In the future, when you are renewing your personal car insurance policy, think twice before you try to save money and cancel or downgrade your UM coverage. It may come in handy when you least expect it. You never know...

A few cases that were cited in Pease v. State Farm include:

• State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nissen, 851 P. 2d 165, 167-68 (Colo. 1993)
• Comet Casualty Co. v. Jackson, 467 N.E. 2d 269 (Ill. App. Ct. 1984)
• American Prot. Insurance Co. v. Parker, 258 S.E. 2d 540, 544 (Ga. App. 1979)
• Longo v. Market Transition Facility of N.J., 741 A. 2d 149, 152-53 (N.J. App. Div. 1999)
• Guiberson v. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co., 704 P. 2d 68, 74 (Mont. 1985)
• Fontanez v. Texas Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 840 S.W. 2d 647, 650 (Tx. App. 1992)

Click here to read the Press Release from the Florida Senate.

However, let's not rule out lawsuits regarding the maintenance of the the structure. This undertone has been looming in the news of late that the officials were warned some time ago about the dangers of this I-35W Bridge that hosted a heavy volume of traffic through downtown Minneapolis, Minn. 

I can't get over the fact that I drove across the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis several times.  I just can't believe this happened.

The survivors have a lot to be thankful for. This was a natural disaster that could have been prevented.

Stay tuned... I am sure there will be lots of ink regarding lawsuits stemming from the collapse of the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis.

 Click Here to read more from the Injurance Journal News.

Both sides have valid arguments in the PIP debate. Our legislators have a tough decision on their hands. According to Hospital lobbyists, the end of the PIP requirement would mean a $350 million loss to hospitals in un-reimbursed medical care. On the Insurance side, Insurance lobbyists claim  that the end of PIP, would only cut a hospitals' profits. Another argument against keeping PIP is  massive amounts of fraud would be eliminated such as fraud rings involving scam artists.

What  will be the fate of the Florida PIP? Only time will tell if Governor Crist and the Florida legislators can save PIP before the clock strikes on October 1.

Click Here to read more on the Florida PIP story from Tallahassee.com

The Law Firm, LaBovick & LaBovick, Civil Justice Prosecutors, is a Plaintiff’s firm. The firm focuses on fighting for Plaintiff’s personal injury victim’s rights in Florida and on qui tam (whistleblower claims) nationwide.  We handle all serious injuries, car accidents, maritime accidents, wrongful death, slip & fall, toxic torts and product liability cases. We have locations in Boynton Beach, West Palm Beach, Jupiter and Port St. Lucie, Florida. Visit our firm website at www.labovick.com for more injury information.

Click Here to read more on the No Fault Insurance Debate in the Palm Beach Post