I was parked when my vehicle was hit, the car was literally off. The defendant's insurance paid 100% of my vehicle damages, including the cost of a rental, etc. Never was there a question that their insured was 100% negligent. Now that a lawsuit has been filed, their attorney is asserting a comparative negligence defense. Is this common, when their insured was clearly at fault? If not, why hasn't the insurance company ever made this claim before? I have an entire video of the exchange between their insured and myself, as well as their company accepting liability right from the scene of the accident. They issued a check for damages the next day, and later authorized a supplement-so why this lame defense? The company is GEICO, which may have something to do with it, but I cannot be sure. Thanks for any input.
Insurance companies don't treat unrepresented parties fairly.
There is nothing unusual about this. What the insurance company did is not relevant or admissible in the case. Move for summary judgment on liability.
I am a former federal and State prosecutor and have been handling criminal defense and personal injury cases for over 18 years. The above answer, and any follow up comments or emails, is for informational purposes only and not meant as legal advice.
This is standard. An offer to settle your property damage prior to any litigation is not binding or even admissible in court. However, there is nothing to worry about. As you describe it, the other party is 100% at fault for the accident. Therefore, you should prevail on this issue in court. Your attorney will likely move for summary judgment on the issue. That means he will make a motion in court asking the judge to find the other side 100% at fault prior to the trial. Good luck.
This is standard practice for a defense attorney. They just want to make sure they cover all possible defenses.
This is a fairly standard procedure when you file a lawsuit concerning your personal injuries. I'm sure your attorney is aware of the factual scenario. Talk with your attorney about the appropriate time at which he or she can file a motion for summary judgment as to liability in the case.
Legal Disclaimer: If this information has been helpful, please indicate below. Mr. Lundeen is licensed to practice law in Florida and Vermont. The response herein is not legal advice and does not create an attorney/client relationship. The response is in the form of legal education and is intended to provide general information about the matter within the question. Oftentimes the question does not include significant and important facts and timelines that, if known, could significantly change the reply and make it unsuitable. Mr. Lundeen strongly advises the questioner to confer with an attorney in your state in order to ensure proper advice is received.
The difference is pre-suit and litigation: in the pre-suit stage, it was just property damage, so the appraiser simply filed his report and they paid up. Now that the matter is in litigation, there is a defense lawyer involved and he/she s throwing in any defense that might be out there, whether there is evidence for it or not. Yeah, so it's lame. So what. Don't let it bother you.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about personal injury law.
Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.What determines Avvo Rating?Experience & background
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline