Liever Hyman Potter
X
During the COVID-19 emergency we are fully operational and remain available to service all new clients and existing clients, 24/7.

WE FIGHT
TO WIN

The attorneys of Liever Hyman Potter

AUTO ACCIDENT ATTORNEYS, PERSONAL INJURY & MALPRACTICE LAWYERS

Since our founding in 1959, we have won thousands of awards and settlements for victims and their families, including million-$ and multi-million-$ settlements.

During the COVID-19 emergency we are fully operational and remain available to service all new clients and existing clients, 24/7.
E-MAIL    |    TEL    610 370 6682    /    570 794 5017    

Our litigation team obtained a settlement with
a lifetime payout of over $12,750,000 for a middle
aged woman who was diagnosed with a brain
arteriovenous malformation.   read more

A $1,280,000 settlement has been reached in
favor of a retired man seriously injured in an
auto accident at a city intersection.   read more

The insurer for the driver of a truck that swerved to
avoid rear-ending a school bus and collided with
another vehicle has paid 1.2 million for the serious
injuries suffered by the other driver.   read more

A daycare center accident that blinded one eye
of a 22-month old child and that “could have and
should have been prevented,” has been settled...
read more

A woman who was seriously injured when her
vehicle was struck by a drunken driver has won
a settlement of 2.5 million.   read more

Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Workers' Compensation; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Products Liability
Workers' Compensation; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Products Liability
Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Contact Us
X

Contact Us

    Lawsuit allowed against both Negligent Driver and Client’s Insurance Company

    March 28, 2010 by admin

    From the Desk of John R. Badal, Esq. (auto accident lawyer/Truck accident lawyer)

    Until recently in Pennsylvania, anyone injured in a car accident or truck accident could only bring suit against the driver who was believed to be at fault in causing an accident . The insurance company representing the at fault driver could not be named as a defendant although the company would be responsible for paying the defendant’s lawyer and any settlement or judgment up to the amount of the liability insurance coverage. If it was believed that the amount of the payment was inadequate then we could bring a claim against our client’s own insurance company if his or her policy had underinsured motorist coverage. Now a County Court Judge in Pennsylvania has ruled that an injured claimant can bring a claim against both the responsible driver and against the injured person’s own insurance company for underinsured motorist coverage in the same lawsuit.

    The underlying personal injury case arose out of a collision which occurred when the vehicle operated by the initial Defendant, struck the rear of the vehicle operated by the Plaintiff. State Farm Insurance Company provided liability coverage to the Defendant, and in a separate policy underinsured motorist (UIM )coverage to the Plaintiff. State Farm Insurance Company opposed the Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint on the ground that the defendant driver would be extremely prejudice(d) in this case if the plaintiffs were allowed to join their UIM carrier on a breach of contract claim in the action.

    This Court relied upon a Pennsylvania Court rule which states that it is permissible to join actions involving the same transaction or occurrence and the same factual questions of liability and damages. In this case, the court found that the auto accident and underinsured motorist claim arose out of the same occurrence, which was the motor vehicle accident, and involved the same factual questions of liability and damages. This Court also noted that a Pennsylvania rule of evidence prohibits evidence that a party was or was not insured, when the purpose or effect would be to influence the findings regarding liability or damages. However, citing Commonwealth, Department of General Services v. United States Mineral Products Company, 809 A.2d 1000 (Pa.

    Cmwlth. 202), the court said that when evidence of insurance is relevant as to other issues in the case it will not be barred merely because it might be prejudicial.

    SEE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BEAVER COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, CIVIL DIVISION-LAW

    BRADISH-KLEIN and KLEIN vs. DONALD KENNEDY and STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, No. 11548 of 2009

    JRB, ESQ. Accident car lawyer/auto accident lawyers February 24, 2010.


    SERVING VICTIMS OF:
    MOTOR VEHICLE INJURY
    CAR ACCIDENTS
    TRUCK ACCIDENTS
    MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENTS
    DRUNK DRIVERS
    SLIP AND FALLS
    WORKERS' COMPENSATION
    OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE
    UNSAFE PRODUCTS/CONDITIONS
    WORK INJURIES
    WRONGFUL DEATH
    INADEQUATE WORKERS COMP.
    MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
    DOCTOR/HOSPITAL ERRORS
    SURGERY ERRORS
    OPERATING ROOM MISTAKES
    PREGNANCY & BIRTH INJURIES
    MISDIAGNOSIS
    FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE
    PRESCRIPTION ERRORS
    FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE CANCER
    NURSING HOME NEGLECT
    NURSING HOME ABUSE
    BED SORES