I'm prepping for two upcoming trials.
In 99% of the cases I have the defendant is insured and the lawyer representing the defendant was hired by the insurance company. In the other 1% of cases the defendant has money.
The first, case I'm working on is a dental battery. The lawyers from the other side, in an effort to be paid by the insurance company, are trying to change it into a malpractice case (insurance companies don't pay lawyers for solely battery claims as they are usually excluded from coverage). I've continued to tell them this is a battery case and I get why they are trying to argue otherwise $$$ :) The defendant in this case has assets and this case is the exception to the rule.
The second case I'm working on is a "he said he said" car crash case. My client and the defendant both say that the other guy ran the red light. What I find interesting about this case is the defendant did not go to the hospital post crash despite the fact the EMS personnel was telling him to go. I don't think he went because I think he passed out at the wheel in a diabetic attack, he has had that happen before. The defendant did go to the hospital later that day. I think he didn't go initally because he didn't want records reflecting what happened. He says his kids were scared that their dad would die so he went home with them. That doesn't make sense. Your kids would want you to go to the hospital. My client fractured his spine in this case. He has recovered as well as one could, but that is a terrible injury to go through and he still suffers. I remember meeting him for the first time in his full upper body back brace. He was wincing the whole time I spoke with him. The defendant driver is insured which is the norm. The jury won't get to hear anything about the insurance company, but they are on the hook to pay, not the defendant driver. I wish I had some explanation for this but the rules don't allow me to bring it up.
Advertising Material, but mostly thoughts, for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com and Brian Dettman
