I am a newcomer to this forum. I have a situation that I would like to
share and seek your opinions and thoughts please. Please read the
entire message.

In Oct 2000, I was involved in a minor fender bender. I was travelling
at about 10 mph because I just turned on to that road. The railroad
crossing lights started flashing and I slammed on my brakes. I slowed
down further but hit a car in front of me at the railroad crossing.
The car may have been pushed about 2-3 ft. After this impact I looked
back (since the railroad warning lights were flashing and bells were
ringing) and saw that the gates started to come down. I backed up
about 20-30 ft and pulled the car over. I then reached to the glove
compartment, searched for the latest registration card & insurance
card, found them. I took them and got out of my car. Examined the
front of my bumper to see the extent of damage. I then went to the car
behind me to see if they have a cell phone to have them call 911. They
did not have cell phone, so I went to the car behind them and
requested them to call 911. Then I walked back to my car. At that
time, I saw the driver of the car I hit examining the damage to her
rear bumper. Then she walked to my car. I told her that I'm sorry I
hit her car. I couldn't stop in time. I then asked her if she was OK?
She said she is fine. She didn't say her car stalled or if she needed
any help. Within the next few seconds, we heard a train whistle and
saw the haed light of the train. Next thing we saw was the car was hit
by the train, was thrown in to the air and hit the warning pole.
That's when we both knew that her car was left on the tracks. The
driver of the other car who I was talking to said, "Oh, my god, I want
my husband back." I realized that there was a second person in the
car. Later we realized that the person left in the car died because of
the train's impact.

There was a witness who testified that there was about 3-5 minutes
between the time of my car's impact and the train's impact. Now the
other driver has sued me. The driver was a 56 year old woman and the
deceased was a 72 year old man. My insurance company would cover up to
my policy limit ($100000), but an arbitration counsel awarded about
$350000. The insurance company decided to reject the arbitrator's
decision. Now, here is my question. I am responsible for the rear
ender but I don't think I am responsible for the death of the
passenger of the car in front of me.

If, in the end, the award to them is more than my insurance policy,
what all can the judicial system do to me to make me pay monetarily?
How can I protect my house from being taken away from me? Can any
body recommend me an attoney in NJ who may have helped their client in
such a situation? The insurance company's lawyer may work until the
policy limit is exhausted. After that I have to defend my interests
myself.

Thank you for your patience in reading this message and your
suggestions are welcome.

phdpudi wrote:

[rear ended a car which subsequently was hit by train due to his impact
pushing it onto tracks. Results in death.]
If, in the end, the award to them is more than my insurance policy, what all can the judicial system do to me to make me pay monetarily? How can I protect my house from being taken away from me? Can any body recommend me an attoney in NJ who may have helped their client in such a situation? The insurance company's lawyer may work until the policy limit is exhausted. After that I have to defend my interests myself. Thank you for your patience in reading this message and your suggestions are welcome.

I understand your logic here thinking you are not responsible for the
death or the destruction of the car you hit. However, there are many
things including legal precedent working against you here.

The first thing I'd do is query the insurance hired attorney to find out
what his take is on the entire accident. You say the insurance rejected
the arbitration, but you don't say if the insurance rejected the
decision based on disagreement of liablility or if it thinks you are at
fault, but not to that money amount.

I am not in NJ so I can't offer any ideas for a defense attorney you
hire for yourself, but you desperately need just such an attorney who is
hired by you and who has ONLY your interests in mind. If you can't find
a personal reference, check with your State Bar for a referral.

If the judgement does go against you, you are in jeopardy of losing any
any all of your assets. Do NOT sign anything until you've found your own
attorney. Also read your policy carefully to find out what role the
insurance attorney has and what obligations your have due to his
representation of you.

Were it me in your place, I'd drop everything until I found my own
attorney who I trusted. I can't overstate how much you need this given
the gravity of your situation.

-paul
ianal

rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com (phdpudi) wrote in message
news:<81c0k0hij7d0c3t84ucqn5sgrfbjlvu8if@4ax.com>... I am a newcomer to this forum. I have a situation that I would like to share and seek your opinions and thoughts please. Please read the entire message. In Oct 2000, I was involved in a minor fender bender. I was travelling at about 10 mph because I just turned on to that road. The railroad crossing lights started flashing and I slammed on my brakes. I slowed down further but hit a car in front of me at the railroad crossing. The car may have been pushed about 2-3 ft.

Hi, welcome to the group. You don't say what USA state you are in,
so my comments are merely general observations. You should ask your
own attorney for more specific information applicable to your case.

If the other car was properly stopped before the limit line for the RR
Xing, being pushed forward 2-3 feet should not have placed them over
the tracks. Either you pushed them farther than you thought, or they
were already in the "danger zone" when the signal began and should
have continued on across the grade crossing instead of stopping. RR
Xings are among the most dangerous road conditions and any experienced
driver should be highly alert of their position in relation to the
tracks whenever driving near one. Were _you_ aware that their car was
over the tracks? I'm not saying you necessarily had a duty to do so,
but it would indicate your awareness of the general situation.
After this impact I looked back (since the railroad warning lights were flashing and bells were ringing) and saw that the gates started to come down.

Did they come down behind, or on top of, the other car? (I'm
assuming it didn't come down in front of them, since the car got hit
by the train).
I backed up about 20-30 ft and pulled the car over. I then reached to the glove compartment, searched for the latest registration card & insurance card, found them. I took them and got out of my car. Examined the front of my bumper to see the extent of damage. I then went to the car behind me to see if they have a cell phone to have them call 911. They did not have cell phone, so I went to the car behind them and requested them to call 911. Then I walked back to my car. At that time, I saw the driver of the car I hit examining the damage to her rear bumper. Then she walked to my car. I told her that I'm sorry I hit her car. I couldn't stop in time. I then asked her if she was OK? She said she is fine. She didn't say her car stalled or if she needed any help. Within the next few seconds, we heard a train whistle and saw the haed light of the train. Next thing we saw was the car was hit by the train, was thrown in to the air and hit the warning pole. That's when we both knew that her car was left on the tracks.

An awareness that, unfortunately, she should have had as soon as her
car was near the tracks, perhaps even before you hit her.

But what a horrible experience for both you and the other driver, I'm
sure. I don't know what a jury would say about whether she should be
excused from that awareness by reason of the shock of the first
collision.
The driver of the other car who I was talking to said, "Oh, my god, I want my husband back." I realized that there was a second person in the car. Later we realized that the person left in the car died because of the train's impact.

Again, how awful. Which does give this case some potential for a
verdict that is enhanced (larger) by reason of the emotional impact of
the liability facts.
There was a witness who testified that there was about 3-5 minutes between the time of my car's impact and the train's impact. Now the other driver has sued me. The driver was a 56 year old woman and the deceased was a 72 year old man. My insurance company would cover up to my policy limit ($100000), but an arbitration counsel awarded about $350000. The insurance company decided to reject the arbitrator's decision.

I'm assuming you're in a state where participation in mandatory
non-binding arbitration is a prerequisite to getting a jury trial.
The jury you eventually get will not be bound by the arbitrator's
decision and may put a higher, or lower, value on the case.

The lawyer provided by the insurance company is legally required to
represent _you_, not the company, in the lawsuit. You should have a
good working relationship with him as your lawyer. However, since
there is a risk of an excess verdict and (as you recognize) there are
economic pressures on the atty hired by his "real" client, the ins.
co., which may conflict with his duties to you as his "temporary"
client, most if not all states allow you to retain your own,
independent atty to make sure your financial interests are protected.
Usually this means putting pressure on the ins. co. to settle within
policy limits and/or extracting a promise from them that if they
decide to "roll the dice" and go to trial in the face of an
opportunity to settle within limits, they will pay any verdict even if
it exceeds the limits. In some states, the ins. co. is also required
to reimburse you for the cost of your own indept. atty in addition to
the one they selected.
Now, here is my question. I am responsible for the rear ender but I don't think I am responsible for the death of the passenger of the car in front of me.

What you "feel", unfortunately, isn't a good guide to what the
ultimate outcome will be. That's why real advice from an actual atty
familiar with all your relevant facts and your state's law is
essential.

One issue is that when you commit a negligent act such as rear-ending
someone, you are responsible for _all_ the harm flowing from that
negligence, even if under the circumstances it exceeds the amount of
harm that would usually flow from that particular act. OTOH those
damages must be "foreseeable" and "proximately caused" by your
negligent act or they may not give rise to any liability at all.
Another way of putting that, in cases like yours, is to ask whether an
"intervening cause" (the RR train, or more specifically the lady's
failure to notice and act on the fact that her car was sitting on the
tracks) should be seen as an unforeseeable consequence of your
original negligence so as to cut off "proximate causation" between
your original negligent act, and the ultimate harm. These are defined
legal terms but it is up to the jury to decide whether they apply in a
particular case.

A second issue is that most states now use some form of "comparative
negligence" anyway, so even if the other driver is partly at fault for
her own loss, she will not be deprived of compensation; the jury will
decide both (a) what percentage of fault to assign to both you and the
other driver, and (b) what the total value of plaintiff's loss amounts
to. The judge will then multiply that value times the percentage of
_your_ fault to reach the ultimate judgment amount. For instance, if
the jury finds that the loss is worth $600000 and that you are 75% at
fault, the verdict will be for $450,000. In some states, under one
of several versions of "modified" comparative fault, if the plaintiff
is e.g. more than 50% at fault for her own loss, she cannot recover.
Others may use a "straight" comparative fault scheme that allows some
recovery for the victim even when most of the fault is her own. In a
death case, you could easily face a verdict for more than your policy
limits even if the other side is the one primarily at fault.

The exact legal ramifications of your state's laws can and should be
explained to you by your atty. But the fact is, as things stand now,
you face significant _risk_ of being found liable for large damages
when the case does come to trial. So you really should hire an
indept. atty to safeguard your interests.
If, in the end, the award to them is more than my insurance policy, what all can the judicial system do to me to make me pay monetarily?

All kinds of things. Basically, they can seize and sell any assets
you own (exempting only whatever your state's law provides as a bare
minimum for your continued sustenance under what is usually called the
"homestead" law) to satisfy the judgment.
How can I protect my house from being taken away from me?

The NJ homestead law may allow you to keep a certain amount of equity
in the house, and won't put your family on the street, but you may
have to take out a large second mortgage on your existing equity and
use it to pay the judgment.

Don't try any "funny stuff" such as transferring the house to the name
of a relative, etc. These schemes generally do nothing useful to
protect your assets and may be reversed as a "fraudulent transfer" and
seized anyway. And if it's not in your name, it may not be protected
by the homestead exemption! Obviously, you would want to consult an
atty about other specific steps you might be able to take rather than
trying something on your own.
Can any body recommend me an attoney in NJ who may have helped their client in such a situation? The insurance company's lawyer may work until the policy limit is exhausted. After that I have to defend my interests myself.

Did they tell you that? I would be surprised if that is what NJ law
says. More likely, the duty to defend continues until the verdict,
even in an excess case. Your $100k limit isn't "exhausted" yet,
anyway; they haven't given the other side a nickel yet, and won't
until after the verdict comes in.
Thank you for your patience in reading this message and your suggestions are welcome.

Ask your friends who have ever used a lawyer for anything, for the
names of lawyers they had a good experience with. Then call those
lawyers, and ask for a referral. Either they'll be able to help you
(this is not an esoteric specialty, there are many many lawyers who
could competently and effectively represent your interests in an
excess-exposure case) or they will know a colleague whom they can
recommend. Second-best way would be to call your local bar assn. for
a referral. As a last resort, look in your yellow page ads. You
want an atty who does "insurance law". Good luck,

--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.

Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300

Michael,

In the matter where the poster seeks help and advice with regard to a
tragic accident at a railroad crossing I think your response was quite good.
I read of this episode in another newsgroup. I was greatly troubled with his
account of his actions. Nowhere in his description of the events does he
indicate that he offered aid or assistance to the other parties. He checks
his vehicle for damage, locates a cell phone, and calls the police. He does
not approach the other car. He does not check to see if driver and
passengers are ok. He does not examine the damage that he caused. He does
not notice that they are on the tracks. Won't these failures on his part
haunt him in court? I think that if this goes to a jury the award will
exceed the arbiter's award
I'm also surprised that he believes that the arbiter's decision was
refused by the insurance company. Isn't this a decision that he made?

Dave M.

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:27:44 -0400, mjacobslaw@comcast.net (Michael
Jacobs) wrote:
rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com (phdpudi) wrote in messagenews:<81c0k0hij7d0c3t84ucqn5sgrfbjlvu8if@4ax.com>... I am a newcomer to this forum. I have a situation that I would like to share and seek your opinions and thoughts please. Please read the entire message. In Oct 2000, I was involved in a minor fender bender. I was travelling at about 10 mph because I just turned on to that road. The railroad crossing lights started flashing and I slammed on my brakes. I slowed down further but hit a car in front of me at the railroad crossing.

(snipped)
Ask your friends who have ever used a lawyer for anything, for thenames of lawyers they had a good experience with. Then call thoselawyers, and ask for a referral. Either they'll be able to help you(this is not an esoteric specialty, there are many many lawyers whocould competently and effectively represent your interests in anexcess-exposure case) or they will know a colleague whom they canrecommend. Second-best way would be to call your local bar assn. fora referral. As a last resort, look in your yellow page ads. Youwant an atty who does "insurance law". Good luck,

great comments...I would add that you may want to consult with a
Bankruptcy attorney just in case.....you probably would be able to
discharge this type of judgment/liability in a Chapter 7....

Hondo

"David Martel" <marte005@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<q64hk09h5trrqt5ik7puvq3su3l8dbg8ed@4ax.com>... Michael, In the matter where the poster seeks help and advice with regard to a tragic accident at a railroad crossing I think your response was quite good. I read of this episode in another newsgroup. I was greatly troubled with his account of his actions. Nowhere in his description of the events does he indicate that he offered aid or assistance to the other parties. He checks his vehicle for damage, locates a cell phone, and calls the police. He does not approach the other car. He does not check to see if driver and passengers are ok. He does not examine the damage that he caused. He does not notice that they are on the tracks. Won't these failures on his part haunt him in court?

They very well could, although we don't know all the facts -- maybe he
did do something, or maybe he didn't have time, or maybe they all
dropped the ball, him _and_ the other lady. But that's why most
states apply comparative fault principles and why his exposure to an
excess verdict is very real even if he thinks he acted reasonably
after the crash.
I think that if this goes to a jury the award will exceed the arbiter's award

Yes it could. If the state he's in (NJ?) doesn't have a cap on
recovery, it could be huge. Even with a cap, it could be much more
than his $100k of per-person liability coverage or the $350k (AFAIR)
awarded by non-binding arbitration.
I'm also surprised that he believes that the arbiter's decision was refused by the insurance company. Isn't this a decision that he made?

Some policies give the ins. co. the right to accept or refuse
settlements. It's the ins. co's money at stake, at least up to his
coverage limits, and his own money at stake, to the extent the award
exceeded coverage. That's why this is a decision he _should_ have
helped them make, preferably with his own indept. atty advising him,
_before_ the arb. hearing and well before the award. But
realistically, with $100k in coverage, the only way he could ask the
ins. co. to accept the award is if he is willing to put up $250k of
his own money to pay the award (along with the $100k from the
insurer). So, after the fact, he didn't have much real choice.

But I do hope he goes and gets independent counsel before taking any
other steps.

--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.

Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300

Dave M.

"David Martel" <marte005@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<q64hk09h5trrqt5ik7puvq3su3l8dbg8ed@4ax.com>... Michael, In the matter where the poster seeks help and advice with regard to a tragic accident at a railroad crossing I think your response was quite good. I read of this episode in another newsgroup. I was greatly troubled with his account of his actions. Nowhere in his description of the events does he indicate that he offered aid or assistance to the other parties. He checks his vehicle for damage, locates a cell phone, and calls the police. He does not approach the other car. He does not check to see if driver and passengers are ok. He does not examine the damage that he caused. He does not notice that they are on the tracks. Won't these failures on his part haunt him in court? I think that if this goes to a jury the award will exceed the arbiter's award I'm also surprised that he believes that the arbiter's decision was refused by the insurance company. Isn't this a decision that he made? Dave M.
Thanks for your insights. I tried posting a couple of times and the
mail was rejected for excess reference material etc.
The arbitration was a mandatory non-binding one. My policy limits are
100000 per person/ 300000 per accident. Yes, the attorney appointed
for me by the ins. co. advised me that the insurance co would cover
upto 200000 because there are two different lawsuits (pain/suffering
of the deceased and emotional hardship of the plaintiff). If it goes
to a trial, the award could be more and fault attributed to me for his
death could be 50% or less. If the other party gets a fault of 50% or
more they cannot collect anything for the accident according to NJ
law. However, he said that it would settle out of court. He assured me
that if at any point he feels that it won't, he'd guide me
accordingly. He took depositions of the the other driver and
witnesses. He felt/understood that she also feels that she could have
moved her car away from the tracks but she was in a shock.
By the time I backed up, got my papers out and located a cell phone in
a car stopped behind mine, I saw the driver of the car I hit out of
her car and examining the damage to the rear of her car. Then she
started walking to my car which I backed up about 20-30 ft from the
impact site. Hence, I did not approach her car. First of all I was in
a shock that I even caused an accident because that was first time
ever some thing like this happened to me. Then when she came near my
car I asked her if she was OK and if her car was OK. She said yes. At
that point I had no idea that she had a passenger in her car. Neither
did she mention about her passenger nor did I have the foresight of
asking about it. Like I backed up from the tracks & gate, I thought
she pulled her car forward away from the tracks. She had the
"opportunity" to get her car away from the train's path as I had.
Anyway, I am trying to talk to couple of other attorneys to appraise
them of my situation and their advice. I shall post what comes out of
it. Thanks again for your help.

Jerry Jeff Walker <no-one@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:<n3vlk096lfo6pto2jhc7mpu0ecbjuj6275@4ax.com>... On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:27:44 -0400, mjacobslaw@comcast.net (Michael Jacobs) wrote:rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com (phdpudi) wrote in messagenews:<81c0k0hij7d0c3t84ucqn5sgrfbjlvu8if@4ax.com>... I am a newcomer to this forum. I have a situation that I would like to share and seek your opinions and thoughts please. Please read the entire message. In Oct 2000, I was involved in a minor fender bender. I was travelling at about 10 mph because I just turned on to that road. The railroad crossing lights started flashing and I slammed on my brakes. I slowed down further but hit a car in front of me at the railroad crossing. (snipped)Ask your friends who have ever used a lawyer for anything, for thenames of lawyers they had a good experience with. Then call thoselawyers, and ask for a referral. Either they'll be able to help you(this is not an esoteric specialty, there are many many lawyers whocould competently and effectively represent your interests in anexcess-exposure case) or they will know a colleague whom they canrecommend. Second-best way would be to call your local bar assn. fora referral. As a last resort, look in your yellow page ads. Youwant an atty who does "insurance law". Good luck, great comments...I would add that you may want to consult with a Bankruptcy attorney just in case.....you probably would be able to discharge this type of judgment/liability in a Chapter 7.... Hondo

I used the first method suggested (going via referrals) to set up my
appointments with a couple of lawyers. After talking to them I would
have to decide who I should go with.
The ins. co. appointed attorney said in the unlikely event of this
case not settling out of court and judgement being so unfavorable, I
have the option of just what you mentioned. I don't want to have to
think about that since the good credit I have built up so far will go
down the drain.
However, I am just curious. How does the Chapter 7 work? If you have
the assets till the judgement is given in your name (I was suggested
in this forum not to try any "funny stuff" like transferring them into
relatives names etc.), how can you declare bankruptcy after the
judgement is awarded? Thank you very much for your responses.

mjacobslaw@comcast.net (Michael Jacobs) wrote in message
news:<qjdsk0hpg6aub2r6lmft9kn05as8hf9dgr@4ax.com>... "David Martel" <marte005@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<q64hk09h5trrqt5ik7puvq3su3l8dbg8ed@4ax.com>... Michael,
Some policies give the ins. co. the right to accept or refuse settlements. It's the ins. co's money at stake, at least up to his coverage limits, and his own money at stake, to the extent the award exceeded coverage. That's why this is a decision he _should_ have helped them make, preferably with his own indept. atty advising him, _before_ the arb. hearing and well before the award. But realistically, with $100k in coverage, the only way he could ask the ins. co. to accept the award is if he is willing to put up $250k of his own money to pay the award (along with the $100k from the insurer). So, after the fact, he didn't have much real choice. But I do hope he goes and gets independent counsel before taking any other steps.
This is my fourth attempt to post a reply to Mr. Jacobs. It was
rejected for excess reference material and no reference material etc.
I hope this goes through. My appointment with an independent attorney
is later this week.

In the meanwhile, can you please explain what my insurance company
"should" pay the plaintiff. My liability coverage is $100000 per
person and $300000 per accident. One person died because of the
train's impact. His wife is suing for damages to her life. Is the
insurance company required to pay upto 300000 because of all the
liability flowing from this accident or no more than 100000?
I talked to the insurance company sales/service person and she says
the insurance company can/will pay upto 300000. But she said it is
only lawyers that can tell me/decide whether the ins co should pay
300000 in this case. The ins. co. appointed attorney said it is 200000
since there are two cases (pain & suffering of the victim and
emotional damage to the wife). What is the amount that ins. co likely
to cover 200000 or 300000? Isn't the ins. co liable for all 300000
since it is liability from the same accident? Thanks for your expert
opinion.

In article <eut6l0h82gluag8jmdvh9728pniq8hab1i@4ax.com>,
phdpudi <rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com> wrote:
In the meanwhile, can you please explain what my insurance company"should" pay the plaintiff. My liability coverage is $100000 perperson and $300000 per accident. One person died because of thetrain's impact. His wife is suing for damages to her life. Is theinsurance company required to pay upto 300000 because of all theliability flowing from this accident or no more than 100000?

If the policy is the standard kind, it will pay up to $100,000 per
person, and up to $300,000 per accident. Since there are two people
involved, the limit is $100,000 each, or $200,000; the per-accident
provision doesn't matter, since its limit is higher. (If the victim
also had children, say, who were additional plaintiffs, the limit
_might_ be $300,000, depending on how the policy defines "person" to
whom the $100,000 limit applies.)

Seth

>My liability coverage is $100000 perperson and $300000 per accident.

The insurance company is required to pay the lesser of these two amounts.

What this means is that if there were four injured parties, your insurance
company would only pay a maximum of $300,000 even if each injured party was
entitled to $100,000.

In the case in question, there are only two "injured" parties, so the maximum
coverage is $200,000.

While it is possible that the insurance company may agree to pay up the first
$300,000, they are not legally required to do so.

Ira Smilovitz

phdpudi <rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com> wrote:In the meanwhile, can you please explain what my insurance company"should" pay the plaintiff. My liability coverage is $100000 perperson and $300000 per accident. One person died because of thetrain's impact. His wife is suing for damages to her life. Is theinsurance company required to pay upto 300000 because of all theliability flowing from this accident or no more than 100000?I talked to the insurance company sales/service person and she saysthe insurance company can/will pay upto 300000. But she said it isonly lawyers that can tell me/decide whether the ins co should pay300000 in this case. The ins. co. appointed attorney said it is 200000since there are two cases (pain & suffering of the victim andemotional damage to the wife). What is the amount that ins. co likelyto cover 200000 or 300000? Isn't the ins. co liable for all 300000since it is liability from the same accident? Thanks for your expertopinion.

I'm not an expert, nor a lawyer. But my take on this is that the
insurance company is responsible for up to $200K. The limit is $100K
per person, and there are two people: the husband, who was killed
(wrongful death and perhaps pain and suffering before he died) and the
wife (emotional damage, loss of consortium).

The $300K limit is a maximum per accident. So if there had been
_four_ people in the car, the limit would be $100K for each person,
but no more than $300K _total_.

For example, say you hit a car with 4 people in it, and the case goes
to trial and the jury awards them $50K, $30K, $150K, and $120K. Your
insurance company would probably have to pay only $280K, because the
$100K per person limit would probably apply to the $150K and $120K
verdicts.

But if the verdicts were $90K, $100K, $150K and $120K, the insurance
company would pay out a total of $300K, which would be pro-rated in
some fashion among those four plaintiffs. There could be some
negotiation but if nobody could agree I would guess that the insurance
company would pay $69,231 to the first plaintiff and $76,923 to each
of the others. That's 300/390 x $90K, and 300/390 x $100K,
respectively.

That, of course, assumes that the insurance company agrees with the
settlement. They don't _have_ to, they can go to trial. But then
they will have to pay for defending you at the trial. Or the wife
could refuse to accept only $200K when the total damage award is much
higher. Then she would probably have to go to trial (unless _you_
accept the additional damages) and your insurance company _still_ has
to pay for your defense. And of course she would still only be able
to get the $200K _plus_ any assets you have above the exemption for
bankruptcy. That will mean a long and expensive trial (over who is
how much at fault and how much the total damages should be), and if
you're a working stiff with not much savings, she wouldn't get much
more than the insurance is offering anyway.

And if you _do_ have significant assets, you would be well advised to
buy "umbrella insurance" to protect you once this case is over.
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.

rameshrachapudi@hotmail.com (phdpudi) wrote in message
news:<eut6l0h82gluag8jmdvh9728pniq8hab1i@4ax.com>...
This is my fourth attempt to post a reply to Mr. Jacobs. It was rejected for excess reference material and no reference material etc. I hope this goes through. My appointment with an independent attorney is later this week.

Good; that's who you really should be asking these questions to.
In the meanwhile, can you please explain what my insurance company "should" pay the plaintiff.

That depends on what your state's (NJ?) law determines to be the
number of separate claims being made, and on the exact language of
your ins. policy.

Some policies have BI coverage language that goes, "no more than $X
per claim for bodily injury, but no more than $Y per occurrence."
Such a policy _may_ -- that's a big "maybe", not a definite "yes" --
give the full $X in coverage for each separate claim arising from the
loss, even if they derive from bodily injury to the same person.
F'rinstance, you would have (a) the decedent's surviving claim for
pain and suffering, (b) the statutory "wrongful death" claim which
State law may consider a single claim or a separate claim for each
beneficiary, and (c) the direct, personal claim of the driver/wife for
her own mental anguish and suffering as a bystander in the zone of
danger, for seeing her husband brutally killed by the train as well as
for her own personal injury from the accident -- she was in the car
too.

But most policies these days (the ins. cos. having been burned with
court interpretations of excessively broad language in the past) have
coverage language that goes "no more than $X for all claims arising
from bodily injury or death of any one person, but no more than $Y per
occurrence." Such language would treat the wrongful death and
bystander claims as "derivative" claims arising from the dead
husband's own claim and thus subject to a single per-person limit.
That would probably limit your total liability coverage to $100k (your
per-person limit) for all claims arising from the husband's death,
plus whatever the wife's separate injury claim is worth, in the
circumstances you described in your original post.

The only other possibility for extending your coverage is something
called a "bad faith" claim against your ins. co., IF (big if) they
have been offered an opportunity to settle for policy limits,
unreasonably refused to do so, and as a result caused an excess
verdict to be entered against you in the underlying suit. If that
happens -- and a good plaintiff's lawyer will do everything he can to
"set up" the circumstances just right so it _will_ happen -- the usual
followup is that the plaintiff's lawyer will approach you (thru your
indept. atty) and offer to settle his client's claims (under the
excess judgment already entered against you) and forego pursuing your
personal assets, in return for your policy limits _plus_ assignment to
his client of your "bad faith" rights against your own ins. co. He
then pursues, in your name, the ins. co. for their unreasonable acts
that exposed you to the excess verdict. If successful, he can get
not only full compensatory coverage for his client's entire loss as
determined by the jury (way in excess of your policy limit), but
punitive damages on top of that. That's the way it usually works in
states which allow bad faith claims, but I don't even know if NJ
recognizes such a claim.

So don't rely on me. Hire a NJ lawyer, tell him all the relevant
facts, and get the professional opinion you pay for. I can't do that
on limited facts and in any event I am not a NJ lawyer and am not
competent to offer advice on NJ law.
My liability coverage is $100000 per person and $300000 per accident. One person died because of the train's impact. His wife is suing for damages to her life. Is the insurance company required to pay upto 300000 because of all the liability flowing from this accident or no more than 100000? I talked to the insurance company sales/service person and she says the insurance company can/will pay upto 300000. But she said it is only lawyers that can tell me/decide whether the ins co should pay 300000 in this case.

All the agent was telling you is what your per-occurrence coverage
limit is, something she can tell just by reading your policy
declarations sheet from her file. She is not trying to, and
specifically told you she is not able to, interpret how much of that
maximum coverage you would be entitled to claim in this case. Only
your atty can advise you on what you can reasonably claim, and only a
court can ultimately tell you what the final result will be, if your
lawyer is not able to resolve the coverage dispute with the ins. co.
before it gets to that point. The reason you want a lawyer involved
now, is to see if he can _keep_ it from getting to that point. When
you get a lawyer involved too late in the game, usually all even the
best of us can do is figure out a way to minimize your losses and do
damage control.
The ins. co. appointed attorney said it is 200000 since there are two cases (pain & suffering of the victim and emotional damage to the wife). What is the amount that ins. co likely to cover 200000 or 300000? Isn't the ins. co liable for all 300000 since it is liability from the same accident? Thanks for your expert opinion.

My expert opinion is that it is a very good thing you are retaining an
independent NJ atty to advise you, and that you ought to listen to his
advice. Good luck,

--
This posting is for discussion purposes, not professional advice.
Anything you post on this Newsgroup is public information.
I am not your lawyer, and you are not my client in any specific legal
matter.
For confidential professional advice, consult your own lawyer in a
private communication.

Mike Jacobs
LAW OFFICE OF W. MICHAEL JACOBS
10440 Little Patuxent Pkwy #300
Columbia, MD 21044
(tel) 410-740-5685 (fax) 410-740-4300

Michael Jacobs wrote:
The only other possibility for extending your coverage is something called a "bad faith" claim against your ins. co., IF (big if) they have been offered an opportunity to settle for policy limits, unreasonably refused to do so, and as a result caused an excess verdict to be entered against you in the underlying suit. If that happens -- and a good plaintiff's lawyer will do everything he can to "set up" the circumstances just right so it _will_ happen -- the usual followup is that the plaintiff's lawyer will approach you (thru your indept. atty) and offer to settle his client's claims (under the excess judgment already entered against you) and forego pursuing your personal assets, in return for your policy limits _plus_ assignment to his client of your "bad faith" rights against your own ins. co. He then pursues, in your name, the ins. co. for their unreasonable acts that exposed you to the excess verdict. If successful, he can get not only full compensatory coverage for his client's entire loss as determined by the jury (way in excess of your policy limit), but punitive damages on top of that. That's the way it usually works in states which allow bad faith claims, but I don't even know if NJ recognizes such a claim.

I didn't think "bad faith" claims could be assigned -- said
assignment being considered "inconsistant with the intent
of the 'bad faith' law." But it may depend on the state.

--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.