The case arose out of a serious motor vehicle accident, which is typical in my practice area. It was an intersection accident between a pickup truck and a tractor-trailer. As a result, my client - whom we'll call Mary - sustained serious orthopedic injuries to her legs, pelvis and arm.
As is typical, Mary had a good recovery from those multiple fractures, but there were still physical limitations she would carry with her forever. When clients realize that their physical limitations will be permanent, they can spiral downwards emotionally. In Mary's case, the emotional scars became as important as the physical limitations.
When I was a defense lawyer for insurers, I learned firsthand the power of creating exposures to both sides.The key in a case like this is early psychological intervention and support once the signs of the spiral begin to appear. For Mary, the psychological impairments became the basis of a Catastrophic Impairment designation.
Careful evaluation of Mary's situation led us to get a future care cost analysis for her needs. After that was done, we evaluated what could be obtained from the tort defendant and what could be obtained from the accident benefits carrier. By creating exposures to each side, we were able to put them both in a position where they wanted to discuss a resolution with us.
When I was a defense lawyer for insurers, I learned firsthand the power of creating exposures to both sides. Few lawyers use both tort and accident benefits exposures effectively. While the accident benefits regimes have changed multiple times over the years, the theory remains the same: use the accident benefits to build the tort and then use both sides against each other to maximize compensation for the client's injuries.
As in this case, the theory works when its implemented skillfully. It's what we do for our clients.
Albert Conforzi is a personal injury lawyer with Pace Law Firm in Toronto. His posts generally appear on Mondays.
About
Tags
Popular
0 comments:
Post a Comment