Recently in Auto Accident Category

May 5, 2010

County-insurer Refuses to Pay Judgment

In December 2004, a man was severely injured when the tire of his car got caught on a six-inch lip on the roadside and he lost control crashing into a guardrail that impaled the vehicle. The man was left with a amputated left leg and an almost severed left arm. He sued the county that was responsible for maintaining the road, and won a verdict of $31 million.

Days after the verdict, the county's insurer sued the county claiming that it should not have to pay because the county's attorney did not properly prepare for trial or adequately update the insurance company. The county claims that the case was handled properly and that the insurance company only voiced its concerns after the verdict. Meanwhile, the man continues to have pain from the accident and cannot receive the medical treatment he needs until the judgement is paid.

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury please call my offices at 1(800) 320-0080.http://www.maryland-attorney.us/lawyer-attorney-1112627.html

Bookmark and Share
May 15, 2009

Baltimore Personal Injury Report -- Independent Exams for Injured Workers May Not Be So Independent

According to published reports the use of independent medical examiners, or Independent Medical Examinations ("IME") as most insurance companies would call it, or Defense Medical Examinations ("DME") has come into question due to discrepancies between the exam of the person and the report of the doctor. Under the workers' compensation system, workers with bona fide injuries are entitled to medical care and replacement wages which are usually paid for by their employer's insurer. Independent exams are used to weed out workers who exaggerate injuries or get unnecessary care by having a neutral exam by a doctor that the insurance company selects and pays for. A review of case files published by the NYT found that the exam reports are routinely tilted to benefit insurers by minimizing or dismissing injuries.

Under Maryland Rules the insurers must seek a court order to have the injured person examined by a Defense Medical Examiner, unless both the Plaintiff and the insurer agree otherwise. Claimants are permitted to bring anyone along they choose to witness or film the sessions. But this has not stopped the doctors from saying one thing in the exam and putting the exact opposite on the report. For example, my Baltimore office had a case where the DME doctor examined an injured person whom we represented and provided two different reports with completely different scenario and opinions. A good practitioner can take advantage of these discrepancies and discredit the doctor's opinions based on his own reports.

For their part, the doctors argue that they do not write the final reports but instead either send a transcription or a checklist into the entities who the insurers go through to get the doctor appointments. The doctors then receive the report back and sign off, but as one doctor put it "I just sign them...If I read them all, I'd have them coming out of my ears and I'd never have time to talk to my wife. They want speed and volume. That's the name of the game." The insurers use of Defense Medical Examinations, that are not so independent, is a practice that is depriving many legitimately injured people from receiving the compensation they deserve and need.


Continue reading "Baltimore Personal Injury Report -- Independent Exams for Injured Workers May Not Be So Independent" »

Bookmark and Share