My wife was driving along a city street when her car was struck by a golf ball, the person who hit the ball is unknown and the manager claims no liablility and said it was assumption of risk for driving near the course when another route could hav...
I think you have a shot at getting paid by pointing out that there is no netting. There should be a net, I would think. The golfer would not be liable because he/she didn't do anything wrong. It is normal for golf balls to fly off of a course, so the golfer wasn't negligent. The course would have a duty to protect the public from stray golf balls though. The problem you have is what to do to force them to pay if they refuse. In California, we have "small claims court" where a person can pay a few dollars to file a complaint against someone - kind of a Judge Judy thing. It is cheap and easy. But they should pay.See question
My mother passed away 10 years ago due to cancer. Still I can't let go of the thought I should have done something for her. Anyway we took my mother to the hospital because she was having problems walking on her legs, so when we got there they f...
I am very sorry for your loss, but this does not appear to be a case that you could file. I am a lawyer in California, so I do not know the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania, but I cannot imagine you could file a suit for something 10 years ago. Also, for any case, you must prove that the negligence (if there was any) caused the death. Since your mother passed away so soon after she went to a doctor, the defendants would claim (with success, I fear) that the two-day delay in making the diagnosis did not change her course. Unfortunately, such advanced cancer could not be cured if found two-days earlier. I hope you are able to find some comfort.See question
I was involved in an accident in which a major car rental company was liable for. It took almost a month of back-and-forth phone calling, and nearly an additional month to get my car fixed. I asked them from the very beginning for a rental car...
They do owe you for rental reimbursement, but probably only for as long as it took to actually repair the car.
Unfortunately, I doubt a lawyer would help because the amount of money involved is probably pretty small.
I would send them your receipt and keep after them. They should pay this.
My chapter 13 was discharged in July09. If I file a personal injury suit from a car accident in 2008, can anyone from the bankruptcy make claim to any money I am awarded as part of the personal injury lawsuit?
This could be a problem for you. If you had the accident before or during your bankruptcy, the injury claim should have been listed as an asset in your bankruptcy. I am not a bankruptcy lawyer, so I do not know more than this.See question
I rear ended a vehicle, there were 3 people in the vehicle. 2 told my insurance adjuster they were fine but one is claiming "soft tissue damage". I have minimal liability limits and I dont work or own a house and my husband makes just enough to pa...
This is exactly why you buy insurance. Your company should handle this claim with minimal inconvenience to you.
If the injuries are serious enough to be worth as much or more than your policy limits, your insurance company has a duty to settle the case. If your company does not settle the case when they should have, they would have breached their duty to you. You buy a policy to protect yourself financially. They are obligated to protect you.
If they don't settle the case when they should have, and the case goes to trial and there is a verdict for more than your coverage limits, you can almost certainly force the carrier to pay all of the damages for their mistake.
If this is a new claim, remember that the injured person won't immediately file a lawsuit. They will try to find a lawyer (yes, a lawyer would take this case probably), and see their doctor(s). After they are done treating, they will try to settle. They will only file a lawsuit (usually) if they can't settle. Most cases are resolved without a lawsuit. Also, if their lawyer knows that the limits of your coverage are minimal, they will try to settle by demanding that your insurance company pay the limits of your policy. The other lawyer will know that if he/she demands that your company pay your limits, your insurance company must do so to protect you. He/she will also know that if your insurance company doesn't protect you by settling, your company may wind up paying a verdict a trial because of their error. That is good news for you because your company will be given a chance to protect you by settling.
And yes, you should write your insurance company and tell them you want this case settled so that you are not exposed to a claim for more than your coverage. Tell them how worried you are because of your financial situation. They need to know that you expect them to protect you.See question
We were driving and a company delivery truck was in front of his. His tire blew and hit the front end of my car and three other cars behind me. He says he is no liable. My insurance company says it should be filed under collision not comprehensiv...
There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this. The first thing to know is that a person is only responsible for an accident when they do something wrong. (In legal terms, they must be negligent before they are liable for damages.) In this case, it is quite possible they did something wrong. For example, if the tire blew because it was worn out, the other party would be at fault because they would have failed to maintain their vehicle. On the other hand, if the driver ran over an object he couldn't avoid and that caused the tire to blow out, the company could claim it didn't do anything wrong. The answer depends on why the tire blew out. Common sense (at least my common sense) tells me the tire probably blew out because it was old. The problem with that might be proving the tire was old. If the tire is gone, one could look to the company's maintenance records.
The problem here is going to be that it is time consuming to do all of the investigation required to figure out why the tire blew out. If no one was injured in the accident, then it is just too much trouble to do that. (If the police came, maybe their report comments on the tire's condition.) The difficulty proving fault is why your insurance company said they probably won't subrogate.See question
I recently sold a car which had been running fine in town. I informed the buyer everything I knew about it, including accident history and all the reasons it had been in the shop in the past (It had overheated once and had a manifold crack once). ...
If the facts are as you state, you should not be liable. You would run into trouble if you misled the buyer, but if you did not you should be OK. The problem with these kinds of issues is that the other person can file an action against you and claim that you lied. Depending on the proof that is available, it would probably just be your word against his, and you could lose. It would be great if, for example, you had some type of writing confirming that you sold the case "as is," but most people don't do that.
One problem the other side could have is that filing an action against someone is expensive and may not be worth the cost, depending on how much the car was sold for. I do not know Oregon's rules for "small claims court.," but if Oregon is like California, the buyer could file a small claims court action for only a few dollars and take his complaint before a judge/attorney who would hear evidence and issue a ruling. If there is no proof except for what the two of you have to say, the buyer has at least some shot of convincing the judge that you misled him.
If it looks like the buyer is going to pursue this or cause a headache for you, and if the repairs needed are not too expensive, you could consider some type of compromise (split the repair cost, for example), to avoid a major hassle.See question
I was involved in an accident that injured the other driver. According to police and witnesses, the other driver was at fault. I have received legal notification that the other driver wants my insurance to cover her costs. What do I do?
The best thing to do at this point is to let your insurance company handle the issue. The claims adjuster should perform an investigation, including taking statements from witnesses and visiting the scene. The adjuster will then make a decision as to who was at fault. If the adjuster determines you were not at fault, he or she will deny the other person's claim. If the adjuster determines you were at fault, there will be efforts to resolve the claim. If the other person files a lawsuit, your insurance company will hire a lawyer to defend you.
For your part, you should provide any information you have to the adjuster. It is also important that the adjuster knows you don't believe you are at fault and that if you are found to be at fault, you want to know what evidence was used to make that decision.See question
hurt mowing my yard
As with many things in the law, the answer depends on the circumstances, and it depends on the law in your jurisdiction. It is possible that they could be considered your employee and be entitled to workers' compensation benefits regardless of whose fault the incident was. If they are not considered your employee, their ability to recover damages would depend on whether you were negligent (i.e., did you do something wrong). For example, if you had left a sharp metal object on the ground in deep grass and that caused injury, you could be at fault.
If you have homeowner's insurance, your insurance company might provide workers' compensation coverage, and it would also provide coverage for your negligence. That means they would hire an attorney for you and would pay any damages up to your liability coverage limits.See question