I Made a Lot of Money This Year Social Media Posts on Injury Cases

I was born in 1982.  As a result, I'm basically on every form of social media available.  I'm also a plaintiff's lawyer so a lot of PI ads pop up on my feed.  Towards the end of the year its almost a requirement that a PI lawyer posts something like: My Firm Resolved X Million Dollars Worth of Cases This Year!"

I'm not sure how I feel about these posts.  Is there any other business in America where it is appropriate to tell everyone how much money you made?   Do cardiologists post about fixing five hundred hearts this past year?  Are lawyers basically just Birdman posting about driving Bentleys and eating lobster?

(I get that this photo is insane, thanks)

I can't explain why, but I'm ok with lawyers posting about a specific case they resolved, but I'd like details about initial offer, facts, etc to see if someone really did a good job.

I really wish there was some way for PI lawyers to advertise something like "I really helped this client who was struggling financially to stay afloat after this crash.  I was always available to help this client and did everything I could to ensure a positive result.  At the end of the day I really made a difference in this clients life."  But that honestly isn't as impactful in our Kardashian World as "I'm RICH!"

I do get saying you recovered X is basically advertising and letting the world know that you are a successful lawyer.  My take is this info probably belongs on a website.  And don't get me wrong, I'm happy that PI lawyers are sticking it to insurance companies.  I'd rather see "competition" do good than big insurance stick it to the little guy.  The question is how can lawyers find a way to say "I'm successful" without the unhumble brag?

FYI, if you are wondering if I'm posting this because I had a crap year....I didn't.  I had my best year yet.  And also, I haven't seen a I Made A Lot of Money This Year Post yet, so this isn't about anyone in particular.

Advertising Material.  Not really, just my thoughts for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com

International Clients: Somalia, Bhutan, DRC, Iran, Vietnam

Louisville is a awesome city for the fact I get to interact with a diverse population and as a result I have represented clients from these countries and others.  I find that a lot of the time my international clients are exceptionally thoughtful, hard working people.  I speak enough French and enough Spanish to communicate at a basic level, but often times we use translators to assist when someone doesn't speak English as their first language.

I feel like I'm constantly slamming insurance companies on this blog (and I assume an insurance adjuster blog would moan about personal injury lawyers so I'm good), but my experience with international clients is certain insurers low ball immigrant clients.  Someone is going to find proof of this some day.  The insurance company would tell you this is a result of what zip code someone lives in.   I would tell you it is based on name.  I have handled enough cases to know that John Smith that lives in area code 40213 gets better initial offers that Muhammad Abdullah living in the exact same area code.

My goal on each and every injury case is to get top dollar for my client, based on who they are as a person and not where they are from.  If you are the victim of a car crash or other injury in Louisville call me for a free case evaluation.

Advertising Material.

J'ai l'impression de claquer constamment les compagnies d'assurance sur ce blog (et je suppose qu'un blog d'expert en assurance gémirait à propos d'avocats en dommages corporels, alors ça va bien), mais mon expérience avec les clients internationaux est celle de certains assureurs immigrés. Quelqu'un va en trouver la preuve un jour. La compagnie d’assurance vous dirait que c’est le résultat du code postal dans lequel vit une personne. Je vous dirais qu’il est fondé sur le nom. J’ai traité suffisamment d’affaires pour savoir que John Smith, qui vit dans l’indicatif régional 40213, a de meilleures offres initiales que Muhammad Abdullah, qui vit exactement dans le même indicatif. Mon objectif pour chaque cas de blessure est d’obtenir le maximum pour mon client, en fonction de qui il est et non d’où il vient. Si vous êtes victime d'un accident de voiture ou d'une autre blessure à Louisville, appelez-moi pour une évaluation gratuite de votre cas

مجموعة متنوعة من السكان ونتيجة لذلك كنت أمثل عملاء من هذه البلدان وغيرها. أجد أن الكثير من الوقت لعملائنا الدوليين مدروسون بشكل استثنائي ، يعملون بجد. أنا أتكلم الفرنسية بما فيه الكفاية والأسبانية كافية للتواصل على المستوى الأساسي ، ولكن في كثير من الأحيان نستخدم المترجمين للمساعدة عندما لا يتحدث شخص ما الإنجليزية كلغة أولى.

أشعر بأنني أقوم باستمرار بإغراق شركات التأمين على هذه المدونة (وأفترض أن مدونة الضبط التأمينية تثير شكوى حول محامي الإصابات الشخصية لذا فأنا بخير) ، ولكن تجربتي مع العملاء الدوليين هي شركات تأمين معينة منخفضة الكروات. شخص ما سيجد دليلا على هذا يوما ما. سوف تخبرك شركة التأمين بأن هذا هو نتيجة للرمز البريدي الذي يعيش فيه شخص ما. أود أن أقول لك إنه يستند إلى الاسم. لقد تعاملت مع حالات كافية لمعرفة أن جون سميث الذي يعيش في رمز المنطقة 40213 يحصل على عروض أولية أفضل من محمد عبد الله الذي يعيش في نفس رمز المنطقة.

هدفي في كل حالة إصابة هو الحصول على أعلى الدولار لموكلي ، على أساس من هم كشخص وليس من هم. إذا كنت ضحية حادث سيارة أو إصابة أخرى في لويزفيل اتصل بي لإجراء تقييم حالة مجاني.

Louisville es una ciudad increíble por el hecho de que puedo interactuar con una población diversa y, como resultado, he representado a clientes de estos países y otros. Encuentro que muchas veces mis clientes internacionales son personas excepcionalmente reflexivas y trabajadoras. Hablo suficiente francés y suficiente español para comunicarme a un nivel básico, pero muchas veces usamos traductores para ayudar cuando alguien no habla inglés como su primer idioma.

Siento que estoy atacando constantemente a las compañías de seguros en este blog (y asumo que un blog de ajustadores de seguros se quejaría de abogados de lesiones personales, por lo que estoy bien), pero mi experiencia con clientes internacionales es que ciertas aseguradoras son clientes inmigrantes de bajo riesgo. Alguien va a encontrar pruebas de esto algún día. La compañía de seguros le diría que esto es el resultado del código postal en el que vive alguien. Le diría que se basa en el nombre. He manejado suficientes casos para saber que John Smith que vive en el código de área 40213 recibe mejores ofertas iniciales que Muhammad Abdullah que vive en el mismo código de área.

Mi objetivo en todos y cada uno de los casos de lesiones es obtener el mejor precio para mi cliente, en función de quiénes son como personas y no de dónde son. Si usted es víctima de un accidente automovilístico u otra lesión en Louisville, llámeme para una evaluación gratuita del caso.Louisville est une ville fantastique pour le fait que je puisse interagir avec une population diversifiée et, par conséquent, j'ai représenté des clients de ces pays et d'autres. Je constate que très souvent, mes clients internationaux sont des personnes extrêmement attentionnées et travaillantes. Je parle suffisamment le français et l'espagnol pour communiquer à un niveau élémentaire, mais nous avons souvent recours à des traducteurs pour aider les personnes qui ne parlent pas l'anglais comme langue maternelle.

.

Why Did My Lawyer Drop My Car Crash Case in Louisville, Kentucky?

I get a call about once a week from an person wanting a new lawyer.  I rarely pick up the case.  The reason is simple, I'm not a pro bono lawyer.  If your lawyer dropped your case there is probably a reason.

I drop cases occasionally.  I do this when 1) I don't think a lawsuit will help the client 2) the client wants more than what the case is worth 3) after further evaluation the case turns out not to be a case that is winnable in front of a jury or 4) the client does something that I think is questionable.

When I do drop a case I call the client and tell them straight up why I'm dropping the case.  I get calls from people stating "my lawyer says he is dropping my case because he isn't doing XYZ anymore and I"m XYZ."  Let me translate that for you that lawyer doesn't want the case and came up with a reason that sounded good as to not piss you off.  Lawyers don't drop "good" cases.

All that said, I have taken two cases other lawyers have dropped.  One was where the other lawyer presumably didn't understand under-insured motorist coverage.  The other was a fire case where the other lawyer didn't follow up on a freedom of information request that would have shown him the case was a good case.

#1 and #2 (above) reasons are similar.  I often get what I consider to be top dollar pre-litigation when you consider the costs of a lawsuit.  When I file a lawsuit clients have to pay me more money and the costs of the lawsuit are taken out of the eventual recovery.  What that means is that sometimes when you do the math there is good chance that all of the money will go to lawyers, doctors fees for testimony, and the costs of a lawsuit (like deposition transcripts).  I have heard of greedy lawyers filing suit just to bump up their fee.  That is a terrible business practice.  I don't want a pissed off client two years down the line telling me that none of the money is going to them.

If a client wants a lawsuit on "principle" or to teach them a lesson I'm not a "principle" lawyer.  My job is to get you fully and fairly compensated for your injuries.

#3 occurs when "facts" change meaning that testimony pops up that wasn't previously available or a client isn't as injured as originally thought.

#4 is a rare occasion.  One happened to me this week, I received a call from a debt collector asking me about whether or not my client had a check coming their way on a car crash case.  I told the adjuster I couldn't answer any of the questions, but it was clear that the client had tried to hold off a debt collector by relaying inaccurate information.  If I lose trust in a client I lose trust in a case.

The other issue is that the prior lawyer will have a lien for "services rendered."  Depending on who that other lawyer is they may think they are entitled to a significant fee and thus I'd be really working for that lawyer at the end of the day.

Lawyers don't share this information which is why I think its important.

Its not really Advertising Material.  but I'll write Advertising Material here :) www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com

Claiming "Board Qualification"...Not Board Certification

I had an interesting time deposing a "IME" ("Independent" Medical Examination) Doctor last week.  My client was rear ended by a jeep.   Moderate damage to my clients vehicle and no real damage to the jeep.  My client has a positive MRI finding an no prior issues with his back.  It was a trial deposition for the defense so they got to ask questions first.

After twenty something minutes of opining that my client wasn't hurt as a result of the crash I was given the chance to cross examine.   About four questions in the doctor told me that he wasn't comfortable providing opinions concerning the relatedness of the crash and the injury/medicine involved due to complications with law and ethics.  Huh?  My response was obviously "well you just spent twenty minutes discussing the exact same thing with the defense, but now all of a sudden you won't be providing any opinions?!"

He changed his tune and started answering my questions.  I thought it was good tactic on his part.  State that ethically you can't answer something the Plaintiff's lawyer is asking you, but answer all of the defense questions.

He did have some interesting things to say concerning his qualifications.  Doctors make a big deal about being "Board Certified."  Basically you practice medicine for a certain period of time and then you take a test to become Board Certified.  This doctor was asked if he was Board Certified and he stated he was "Board Qualified."  Board Qualified I asked him..."what exactly does Board Qualified mean?"  It meant that he was eligible to take the test, never did take the test,
and was not Board Certified.  I asked him if that was the same thing as going to law school, but never taking the bar examination.  He didn't like that question.  But CMON MAN! Just say you aren't Board Certified and move on.  No need to give some shady answer about being qualified. 

Side note, this doctor, for the past thirteen years, hasn't practiced medicine, but instead does these reviews for lawyers.  He does them for the defense, but doesn't keep a record.  He doesn't keep a record because he doesn't want Plaintiffs lawyers to know exactly how many he is doing.  This is a common trick "IME" doctors do.

I hope the jury sees thorough all of this guys nonsense.

"I do this all the time and nobody objects"

I went to a pre-trial conference a few weeks ago on a rear end collision case.  The judge is no nonsense and calls balls and strikes as she sees them.  The lawyer for the other side is a nice guy who talks really fast.  He is exceptionally proficient in cross examination, but his directs are basically him testifying about his position in the case and not really asking questions.  A lot of the questions are compound questions.  I had a decent amount of objections to his questioning.

The most interesting (objectionable :) questions he asked related to whether or not my treating physicians would respect the decision of the jury if the jury awarded my client zero money.  To me that is objectionable on two levels: 1) it invades the Provence of the jury and 2) its irrelevant.   Its the equivalent of me asking his doctor: so if the jury awards 14 million dollars for my client you are ok with that, right?  A jury shouldn't care what he doctor thinks about their award.  A jury should award or not award damages based on the testimony and evidence.  A jury shouldn't base their opinion on damages because some person in a white suit says they will be happy with whatever the jury does.  Happy the judge got this one right.

As I'm walking out the lawyer for the other side, who I genuinely believe is trying to help me in other cases, said I should use that line of questioning in other cases.  I'm not going to do that :)

Defense Doctor and Insurance

I was cross examining a doctor for the defense yesterday and asked her what percentage of cases she does for the Defense versus Plaintiffs.  She told me she doesn't keep track of it.  How convenient!  She did admit that she does most of her work for insurance companies.  I already knew that.

After the deposition the lawyer for the other side wanted to take out the testimony about the insurance company.  The law doesn't allow me to keep in the fact there is insurance so I agreed.  The theory behind it is that a jury knows there is insurance than a jury is inclined to award higher damages.  The reality is that insurance is the elephant in the room that nobody talks about and everyone knows is there.  From my perspective the lawyer on the other side is going to allege that this evil plaintiff's lawyer is out for gold and that his poor penniless client can't afford it.  That isn't true.  In this case the other side has $300,000.00 in coverage and won't pay my client for her injuries.  They would rather make her jump through hoops and try the case to a jury. 

The doctor also told me that she looked at photos of my clients damage to determine my client wasn't hurt.  I asked her if the lawyer for the defense send her photos of his clients damage for her assessment.  She told me no.  I asked her if taking a look at photos of the defendant's car would have made a difference in her evaluation.  She told me it wouldn't make a difference because she isn't a accident reconstructionist.  I didn't push it because I found it funny she looked at one photo and said my client wasn't hurt, but that looking at another photo (which shows more damage) wouldn't help in her evaluation.  Juries are smart.  They will figure it out.  This was also a catapult crash meaning the defendant rear ended a vehicle and slammed it into my client's vehicle.  I asked the doctor how many cars were involved in the crash.  She didn't know.  I wonder if the defense lawyer will pay her another 2K to testify in the future :)

IT IS NOT SAFE IF SOMEONE "WAVES" YOU ALONG IN TRAFFIC

Earlier this month I met with a gentleman that was stopped waiting to take a left turn onto a main roadway.  To his left was a large bush.  In front of him was another vehicle facing the opposite direction at a stop sign.  The other vehicle "waived" him to take his left turn indicating it was safe.  It was not safe.  Coming the opposite direction was a vehicle that, according to the gentleman, had veered around a garbage bag in the middle of the street (you can't make this stuff up).  According to the police report the other driver was in his correct lane. Crash ensued.

I can't tell you how many times someone has come to my office wanting to sue the person that waive them through.  A really bad fractured ankle case comes to mind where my client was the victim of the incorrect waiving.  The first issue is that nobody ever gets the information on the person that waived them through.  They aren't listed on police reports because they leave the scene.  That, plus who is going to admit that they were wrong and waived someone into traffic?  That is the first problem.  The second problem is that you can't rely on a third party to make driving decisions for you.  As such, suing them would be a waste of time. 

The other thought this potential client had was suing the government for failing to make the bush trimmed.  The problem here is that suing people is expensive so you must be really hurt.  Suing the government is very expensive and there is the issue of sovereign immunity.  In this circumstance the damages would not have offset the costs of litigation thus making it a bad situation for the potential client.

Long and short: DON'T TRUST OTHER DRIVERS