Posts

Gregory D. Sobol, Esquire, Joins Zwick Law

/in /by

C.J. Zwick, Esquire, and Matthew R. Zwick, Esquire, are pleased to announce the addition of Gregory D. Sobol, Esquire, to the Zwick Law team.

A Brookville native, Greg routinely serves clients in Jefferson, Clarion, Elk and Clearfield counties.  Greg brings to the firm his experience representing clients in an array of legal matters, including criminal defense, social security disability, workers’ compensation, real estate, estate planning, personal injury and other civil litigation.

“I’ve had the opportunity to work with Greg on several legal matters – from litigation and estate matters to real estate transactions.  Greg always has impressed me with his knowledge of various areas of law.  And he always puts his clients first.  With his addition to the firm, our clients will feel secure knowing that he is looking out for their interests,” said C.J. Zwick.  Matthew Zwick added, “In my experience working with Greg, he takes what is typically considered a professional service, and treats it like a customer service, putting the needs of clients first.  He’ll provide our clients with the peace of mind that they expect and deserve.”

Currently living in Brookville, Greg is a graduate of Brookville Area High School.  He went on to graduate from California University of Pennsylvania, where he earned a Business Administration degree.  Greg then attended Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh, where he served as a review editor of the Duquesne Business Law Journal.  Prior to joining Zwick Law, Greg served as the judicial law clerk for the judges of Warren and Forest Counties before joining a local law firm where he began working in 2016.

Since returning to his hometown, Greg has served as an assistant coach with the Brookville Area High School Varsity Baseball team.  Greg also serves on the Board of Directors at Pinecrest Country Club in Brookville.

Zwick Law is a full-service law firm with offices in DuBois and Brookville, Pennsylvania.  The attorneys at Zwick Law routinely represent corporations, associations, municipalities and individuals across Pennsylvania and West Virginia.  Find out more about Zwick Law by visiting https://zwick-law.com.

BREAKING NEWS: Increase in UIM Policy Limit Considered a ‘Purchase’ Requiring New Stacking Waiver

/in /by

UIM Coverage

On February 5, 2018, the federal District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled that an increase in Under Insured Motorist (UIM) benefits is a new purchase of insurance coverage.  As such, automobile insurance carriers are required to obtain a new waiver of the stacked benefits under the auto insurance policy.

Stacked benefits, in UIM coverage, means that a person who purchases automobile insurance on more than one vehicle under the same policy can elect to purchase up to double the UIM insurance coverage.  The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (“MVFRL”) requires an insurance carrier to offer stacked benefits to every policy holder who purchases insurance.  If the policy holder decides not to take advantage of the stacked benefits, the insurer must obtain a written waiver of those benefits.

For instance, if you insure two cars for $20,000.00 each, you are eligible for stacking benefits that would allow you claim up to $40,000.00 on each vehicle.  The MVFRL requires that the insurer offer this option to each and every insured.

If the insured declines, then the insurer must obtain an express written waiver of the option to purchase “stacked” benefits.

According to the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court in Barnard v Travelers, No. 17-00290, whenever an insured chooses to increase the amount of coverage under her UIM policy, the insurance carrier must obtain a new written waiver of stacked benefits as required by the MVFRL.

Background

Michelle Barnard, the Plaintiff in this case, held a UIM policy with The Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company, the Defendant, since 2007.  When she initially secured the policy, she had UIM coverage limits of $50,000.00 for each of her two vehicles.

At the time of purchasing the initial insurance coverage, she signed a written waiver of stacked benefits under that policy, i.e., Ms. Barnard waived her right to stack UIM benefits under her policy.  With that, the maximum amount of UIM benefits that she could claim, and ultimately receive, under her policy was $50,000.00.

However, in May 2009, Ms. Barnard increased her third-party liability coverage limits under the policy from $50,000.00 to $100,000.00 on each insured vehicle.  So, this meant she would have been entitled to claim up to $200,000.00 on each car, as per her allowable stacked benefits.  Notably, Ms. Barnard did not sign any written waiver of her stacked benefits upon this increase in coverage.

Thereafter, when Ms. Barnard was injured in a car accident on June 17, 2016, she submitted a UIM claim under her policy with Travelers Insurance.  Travelers tendered $100,000.00 in UIM benefits to Ms. Barnard, assuming that she had waived her option to stack her UIM benefits in 2007.  Ms. Barnard, however, rejected this tender and, claiming that she was entitled to more than was tendered, she sued the Travelers.

Increase in UIM limit is a ‘Purchase’

Travelers argued before the Eastern District Court that, among other things, it had no duty to obtain a new waiver of stacked benefits under the policy, even after Ms. Barnard had increased her liability insurance coverage limits in 2009.  In other words, Travelers claimed that the initial 2007 waiver was still in operation and effective, despite the increased coverage purchased by Ms. Barnard in 2009.

The federal district court, however, rejected Travelers’ argument.  Judge Gerald McHugh held that the language of the MVFRL requires a renewed waiver of stacked benefits when liability coverage limits are increased and/or purchased.

According to Judge McHugh, because an increase in coverage under an existing policy requires that an insured pay a higher premium, an increase in coverage limits also qualifies as a “purchase” as defined by the MVFRL.  As a result, the court ruled that Travelers should have obtained a new waiver of UIM stacked benefits, in 2009, when Ms. Barnard increased her liability insurance limits.  Pursuant to the district court’s ruling, Travelers was responsible, and required, to pay Ms. Barnard up to $200,000.00 in UIM benefits under her policy.[1]

For questions relating to the MVFRL and Pennsylvania auto insurance coverages, please contact Matthew R. Zwick, partner of Zwick Law, at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a legal consultation.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[2]

 

[1] Note: Travelers filed an appeal of the district court’s decision to the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which remains pending at the time of publication of this article.

[2] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.  Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

In Pennsylvania, Your Doctor Must Personally Obtain Your Informed Consent

/in /by

 

What is “informed consent?”  Informed consent means that a physician must inform the patient of all material risks, complications, facts and benefits involved in any proposed, nonemergency surgical treatment, so that the patient can make an informed decision about whether to undergo surgical intervention.

Informed Consent

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently decided that doctors in Pennsylvania have an affirmative duty to obtain their patients’ informed consent, and this affirmative duty is non-delegable.  As such, this duty is only discharged when the physician personally obtains the client’s consent. The Supreme Court issued this ruling in Shinal v Toms, 162 A.3d 429 (Pa. 2017).

Under Pennsylvania law, before a physician conducts any proposed, non-emergent treatment on a patient, the patient must receive information concerning the nature of the proposed procedure, as well as the expected, and the possibly unexpected, risks and results.  Generally speaking, in Pennsylvania, similar to the majority of other jurisdictions, a physician has an affirmative duty to advise a patient of the facts, risks, and complications of, and alternatives to, a procedure.  This duty is required under the Pennsylvania’s Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error (“MCARE”) Act.  It is only with this information, that a patient can make an educated or “informed” decision regarding the available options and/or alternatives to medical procedures.

According to the majority opinion of the Supreme Court in Shinal, the aforesaid information must be given, and the consent obtained, by the physician personally (rather than by a physician assistant, nurse or medical aide).  In other words, unless the procedure-related information is provided to a patient by a treating physician, the duty to adequately inform is not discharged.

Background

Mrs. Shinal and her husband sued the defendant, Dr. Toms and Geisinger Clinic in a medical malpractice suit.  Mrs. Shinal, who had been diagnosed with a recurrent non-malignant tumor around her brain, alleged that Dr. Toms failed to properly inform her of the risks associated with a surgery to remove the tumor.

Dr. Toms, denying that he had breached his duty to inform Mrs. Shinal, countered that in a consultation he conducted with the Shinals on November 26, 2007, he had explained the risks of the different approaches to the surgery.  These risks included possible damage or injury to Ms. Shinal’s carotid artery and optic nerve.

According to Dr. Toms, he felt that Mrs. Shinal had understood the risks and wanted him to try and totally remove the tumor which, though risky, would give her a better shot at long-term survival.  Besides, Mrs. Shinal had a telephone conversation with Dr. Toms’ physician assistant (“PA”) on December 19, 2007, and the PA had gone through the risks of the procedure with her again at that time.

On January 31, 2008, Mrs. Shinal had an operation to remove the tumor, during which Dr. Toms perforated her carotid artery.  As a result of the perforation, Mrs. Shinal sustained a hemorrhage, stroke, brain injury and partial blindness.  This medical malpractice lawsuit ensued shortly thereafter.

Jury Instruction: Informed Consent

The Supreme Court was invited to overrule the decisions of the trial court and the Superior Court, both of which exonerated the Defendant.  The reasoning at the lower court and Superior Court had been that the Defendant was not obligated to personally inform the Plaintiff of all of the facts, risks, and complications of the procedure.  The Superior Court further ruled that the Defendant doctor could be assisted in this duty by his PA.

The trial court judge, before the finding of the jury, directed that the jury could consider any information provided to Mrs. Shinal by “any qualified person” working as an assistant to Dr. Toms.

However, the Supreme Court, with a majority of four justices concurring, held that a doctor was personally obligated to inform a patient of the risks and benefits of the procedure, as well as obtain her informed consent to proceed with the proposed treatment.  The case was, therefore, ordered to be retried because, as in the opinion of the Supreme Court, the trial court judge was wrong in his instructions to the jury.

The aggressive attorneys at Zwick Law are standing by to provide you with the legal advice and representation that you need and deserve.  We offer personalized attention and we work tirelessly to maximize the value of our clients’ injury claims.  Our experienced medical malpractice attorneys are always here to discuss your case and provide you with the peace of mind you desrve.

For questions relating to an medical malpractice issue, contact Matthew R Zwick, partner of Zwick Law, at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a legal consultation and free case analysis.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[1]

 

 

[1] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.  Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

What is Workers’ Compensation?

/in /by

Have you been injured on the job? Maybe you twisted your ankle while rushing into the elevator for that meeting with the boss or sprained your wrist while trying to beat that deadline. If you have suffered a work-related injury, you may be entitled to benefits under the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation laws.

workers' compensation

workers’ compensation

The Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act (the “Act”) was enacted to provide no fault recourse for workers who suffer injuries in the workplace.  The Act ensures that no worker will go without some form of compensation for workplace-related injuries. The Act thus requires that all Pennsylvania employers register with an insurer for workers’ compensation coverage.

Every Pennsylvania worker is covered by the Act.  So, even if your employer has failed to procure workers’ compensation insurance coverage, you are still able to obtain compensation benefits under the Uninsured Employer Guaranty Fund.

What is workers’ compensation?

Workers’ compensation laws and regulations provide for you in the event of work-related injuries.  The Act provides financial, medical and other related benefits and support to workers who have been injured on the job.

The Act ensures that injured workers can obtain no-fault compensation for work-related injuries.  However, this “no-fault” insurance coverage comes with a compromise — your right to sue your employer for the injury.

What are some of the requirements to obtain workers’ compensation?

Before you can be eligible to receive benefits under the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation law, you must fulfil some requirements

  1. There must be an employer/employee relationship.

While this is usually straightforward, there are some situations when it is difficult to determine whether the relationship is an employment relationship under the law. For instance, an independent contractor does not qualify as an employee. For the purpose of determining whether a person qualifies as an employee, four things are usually considered:

  • The right of the employee to select the employer;
  • The employer’s right to “sack” the employee;
  • The employer’s power to direct the manner of performing the job; and
  • The employer’s power to control the employee;

Even if you don’t qualify as an employee under these conditions, you may still be an employee under the definition of a “statutory employer”.  For instance, if you are an employee of a sub-contractor that has been hired by a general contractor for a construction-type job, you may be entitled to compensation for work-related injuries. Your employer in this case is a “statutory employer.”

  1. The injury must have occurred under Pennsylvania jurisdiction

If you are hired in Pennsylvania, but often have to work in other states, it won’t matter whether the work injury happen in Pennsylvania, or some other jurisdiction.

  1. You must have suffered the injury in the course of employment

Each situation is usually decided on its merits, on a case-by-case basis. You don’t have to be actively working when the injury occurs, though. You could be playing tennis as part of the company’s sports team or attending a party for the company and possibly still be covered. The important requirement is that you must have been furthering the interest of your employer.

What type of workers’ compensation are you entitled to receive?

Under the Act, you are generally compensated for any disability that occurs as a result of work-related injuries.

Disability, under the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation law, is defined by work loss. A disability may result in total disability, temporary total disability or temporary partial disability. It is total disability scenarios when you are completely unable to work because of the work injury.

The Act defines an “injury” to include any condition caused by an accident or activity at work. As such, injuries need not be caused by accidents alone. Injuries caused by having to do the same thing over and over, such as typing with your back bent or injuries cause by abnormal working conditions, would also qualify as an “injury.”

What benefits can you receive under the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation law?

Depending on your injury, you may be entitled to any one or more of the following benefits:

  • Medical benefits. This would typically include the cost of obtaining medical treatment for the injury.
  • Wage benefits. You are generally entitled to compensation of up to two-thirds, sometimes more, of your average weekly wage. These benefits are not taxable.
  • Death benefits. This would be applicable only in the event of death caused by a wok-related injury. These benefits would be paid to the family or survivors of the employee.
  • Scarring benefits. This compensation is applicable in the event of disfigurement caused by work injury.
  • Specific loss benefits. If loss of limbs is involved, compensation would be payable for that specific loss. This does not mean that the whole limb must be lost though. It would suffice if it is shown that it has been made useless for the job.

How can you obtain workers’ compensation?

The Pennsylvania workers’ compensation law requires that workers who suffer any work-related injury must report the injury to their employer within 120 days – this period starts to run from the date of the injury.  You should always report a work-related injury to your employer, and make sure that an accident report is generated.

Your employer then either accepts or denies the claim. If the claim is denied, you can file a lawsuit to establish your work-related claim. You do this by filing a Claim Petition.

While there is no law that says you can’t fight for the claim on your own, it is generally a good idea to get in touch with an experienced workers’ compensation attorney from the moment you get injured.  The experienced worker’s compensation lawyers at Zwick Law understand how vital quality representation is to your claim.  We are prepared to review your situation and take over the time-consuming and stressful task of negotiating and fighting for you.

For questions relating to a work-related injury, contact Matthew R Zwick, partner of Zwick Law, at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a legal consultation and free case analysis.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[1]

 

[1] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.  Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

Zwick Law Develops New Pennsylvania Adverse Possession Law in Weible v. Wells, 156 A.3d 1220

/in , , /by

By decision of the Pennsylvania Superior Court, Matthew R. Zwick, founding partner of Zwick Law, representing Elizabeth “Louise” Wells and her late husband, William Wells, prevailed on appeal, reversing the trial court’s decision regarding the application of the adverse possession doctrine in Pennsylvania.  The Weible v. Wells decision (reported at 156 A.3d 1220) establishes and creates clear legal principles and guidelines for applying the doctrine of adverse possession in Pennsylvania.

In this case, the Superior Court was tasked with deciding whether the statutorily prescribed period to adversely possess land in Pennsylvania is tolled (paused) or started anew (reset) when property is owned and used for a public purpose by political subdivisions (i.e., counties, townships, boroughs, etc.) during the 21-year statute of limitations for the title owner of the land to file an ejectment action against the adverse possessor.  The Superior Court, agreeing fully with Attorney Zwick, held that the 21-year statutory period was merely tolled, and did not completely reset, under the circumstances presented in this case.

Case Background

This civil case was commenced by Rodger Weible, Louise’s next door neighbor, in August 2009, when Weible filed a complaint in ejectment against Louise and her husband, arguing that the Wellses installed landscaping and a driveway that allegedly encroached upon a portion of Weible’s yard.

Louise and her husband purchased their home in Reynoldsville, Pennsylvania, in August 1965. Thereafter, the Wellses caused landscaping and a driveway to be installed at their residence in 1974 and 1979, respectively.  The Wellses’ landscaping and driveway remained in substantially the same condition and configuration from the respective dates of installation through the time of trial in September 2015 (and as of the date of this article).

From May 30, 1995 through December 22, 1998, the property now owned by Weible was owned by Jefferson County and Clearfield County, political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, operating through the Clearfield-Jefferson Mental Health/Mental Retardation Program.  Weible purchased the property from Jefferson and Clearfield Counties by deed dated December 22, 1998.

The Wellses and Weible lived next to each other without incident until 2008.  In 2008, a tree fell and caused damage to powerlines surrounding the residential lots.  Louise and her husband offered to pay the Borough of Reynoldsville to repair the powerlines; however, they were informed that the fallen tree had come from Weible’s property and that they were not responsible for the cost of repairs.  After the Borough attempted to collect payment from Weible for the damage, Weible hired a local surveyor to survey his property to delineate the boundary line between his lot and the lot owned by the Wellses.  When Weible discovered that the Wellses’ landscaping and driveway appeared to encroach upon property that he believed he owned, Weible requested that the Wellses remove the landscaping.  The instant legal battle ensued.

The Trial Court Proceedings

Weible’s civil complaint was intended to eject, or remove, the Wellses and their landscaping and driveway from the disputed property.  The Wellses raised the defense of adverse possession and countersued Weible asserting ownership of the property in question by virtue of adverse possession.  After a non-jury trial on September 11, 2015, the trial court of Jefferson County, Pennsylvania, found that, because Weible had received his residential lot from a political subdivision (i.e., Jefferson and Clearfield Counties), the Wellses were required to establish their exclusive, adverse possession of the property for 21 years from the date of conveyance from the Counties to Weible in 1998.

As twenty-one (21) years had not passed when Weible filed suit against the Wellses in 2009, the trial court ordered the Wellses to be ejected from the property.  Louise Wells, represented by Zwick Law, appealed this decision by the lower court.

What is Adverse Possession?

The doctrine of adverse possession is a legal concept that allows a trespasser – sometimes a stranger, but more often a neighbor – to gain legal title over land that was once owned by someone else.  The doctrine has developed as a way to achieve a fair result when a land owner has neglected or forgotten about a piece or portion of land, while another has been in possession of and using the land for an extended period of time, such that forcing that person, i.e., the adverse possessor, to depart or vacate the land would create hardship and/or inequity.

Adverse possession in Pennsylvania is established based on the character of a trespasser’s possession and the length of time he possesses the land in question. Under Pennsylvania law, to sustain a claim for title to real property through adverse possession, a litigant must prove her actual, continuous, open, notorious, exclusive, distinct, hostile, and adverse possession of the property in dispute for a period in excess of twenty-one (21) years.

Adverse Possession

While actions in ejectment are commonly employed by the rightful owner of land to recover property from those who have unauthorized possession of the disputed land, the rightful owner must commence an action in ejection within 21 years from the initial date of the unauthorized use.

The Superior Court Appeal

On appeal, Attorney Zwick successfully briefed and argued that Louise and her husband had adversely possessed and exclusively used the disputed property for 21 continuous years without actual interruption by Weible or any of his predecessors-in-interest.  Upon review and oral argument, the Superior Court agreed and reversed the trial court’s decision, ruling that, although the disputed property had been owned by the Counties from 1995 through 1998, during which time the Counties would have been immune from claims of adverse possession themselves, the 21-year statutory period was merely tolled (or paused), rather than reset due to the Counties’ ownership.  The statutory clock began to run again once the disputed property returned to Weible’s private ownership.

Newly Established Law on Adverse Possession

Thus, because the landscaping and driveway that were installed by Louise and her husband in the mid- to late-1970s remained in the same place and configuration through the date of trial in 2015, the Wellses “adversely” possessed the disputed property for well over 21 years.  The Superior Court, therefore, reversed the trial court’s ruling and remanded the case for entry of an order vesting ownership of the disputed property in Louise Wells by virtue of adverse possession.

On behalf of its client, Zwick Law clarified and developed new adverse possession case law in Pennsylvania.  This case illustrates how important it is to have aggressive attorneys fighting for you.  The skilled litigation attorneys at Zwick Law are dedicated to preserving the legal rights of our clients. For a free consultation and case analysis, contact either our DuBois or Brookville office today.  At Zwick Law, we are always here for you.

Tips for Handling a Workers’ Compensation Claim

/in /by

Unfortunately, injuries can occur to anyone – at any time.  If you have been injured while on the job, you have a right to receive workers’ compensation benefits from your employer and its workers’ compensation insurance company.  Pennsylvania workers’ compensation laws were enacted to protect injured employees and their families through the provision of medical benefits, wage loss benefits, and other benefits, such as special loss, death, and funeral benefits.compensation

Knowing how to fully collect your workers’ compensation benefits under the law can sometimes be a daunting and complicated process.  In most situations, after a work-related accident occurs, employers (or, more likely, an employer’s insurance carrier) make obtaining fair and full compensation difficult, regardless of the circumstances, to avoid financial losses or other negative effects of losing an injury claim initiated by an employee.  For many employees and their families, dealing with and managing a workers’ compensation claim often becomes time-consuming, highly adversarial, and complex, as your employer’s insurance carrier attempts to reduce or completely deny your injury claim.

Whether a workers’ compensation claim is approved, contested, or even denied outright, often depends upon whether you were injured at work – and while working in the course and scope of your employment.  To be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits, you must show that: (1) you were employed at the time of your injury; (2) your injury occurred while you were on the job; and (3) your injury was related to and in furtherance of your employment.  Here are a few tips for handling a workers’ compensation claim, which will help to increase your chances of successfully navigating a potentially complicated process.

Record Names and Contact Information For All Witnesses

An aggressive claims adjuster will try to use every trick at their disposal to make it appear as though your work-related injury was an existing medical problem, or one that occurred while you were not working.  With that being said, identifying witnesses who can verify and confirm that your injury occurred while you were at work will carry a lot of weight in winning your case.  So, as soon as is practicably possible, obtain the names and current contact information for all persons who witnessed your incident.  Remember, you may be unable to return to your place of employment, so getting telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and even social media account details of witnesses is something that you should do as soon as possible after a work accident.  If you are physically unable to get the information yourself, you should ask a coworker or family member for assistance.

Be Consistent and Protect Your Interests

The manner in which you explain the work-related accident, your injuries and how the accident occurred – to your supervisors, coworkers, physicians, etc. – should always remain consistent.  Even the smallest discrepancy can be used to discredit your account of the accident and/or create a basis to devalue or deny your claim.  To avoid inconsistencies, document all relevant events in writing at your earliest opportunity and obtain copies (or take pictures) of any and all incident reports and other documents referring or related to the accident and your injuries.

Consult an Attorney as Soon as Possible After a Work-Related Incident

Unsurprisingly, an injured worker, who is eager to have medical bills paid, and to be compensated for time away from work, is also often eager to comply with all requests made by an employer’s insurance carrier.  While cooperation with your employer’s carrier is encouraged (and many times required), it is important that you protect your own rights and interests – remember that your employer, and its workers’ compensation insurance carrier, will always focus on and put their interests first.  If an insurance adjuster requests that you provide a recorded statement, do not do so without first consulting and experienced workers’ compensation attorney.  A statement that is recorded under what appears to be casual circumstances can, and likely will, be used against you later, usually when you least expect it.  Consulting an attorney to handle and manage your workers’ compensation claim, as early as possible, will reduce the amount and number of times that you have to communicate with a claims adjuster.

Talk to a Attorney – Call Zwick Law

Before attempting to handle your claim alone, consider consulting with an experienced workers’ compensation attorney at Zwick Law.  Our attorneys have experience dealing with employers and their insurance companies – Zwick Law will protect your interests while ensuring that you get the compensation that you deserve.

Our team at Zwick Law understands that a workplace injury can be life-altering, and we work on your behalf to obtain the full compensation you need and deserve.  For questions relating to a work-related injury claim, contact Matthew R Zwick, partner of Zwick Law, at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a legal consultation and free case analysis.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[1]

 

 

[1] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.  Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD – TACTICS USED TO REDUCE OR DENY PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS

/in /by

After the occurrence of an accident, which results in personal injuries to you or a loved one, it is not unusual for a claims adjuster from a liability insurance carrier to contact you to express sympathy and offer assistance in a time of need.  While the adjuster’s friendliness and solicitude may seem legitimate, the insurance adjuster’s primary function is to save his employer (i.e., the liability insurance company) money by reducing or greatly diminishing the settlement of your claim.  The tricks and tactics that insurance adjusters use to reduce or deny claims have affected hundreds of people throughout the years—which is why it is very important that all accident victims learn to recognize some of the most commonly utilized methods employed by insurance carriers and claims adjusters.

Becoming fully aware of commonly known tricks and tactics may help you or your loved ones avoid making an error that could prove extremely damaging to a personal injury claim.

Take it Slow – Don’t Rush into a Personal Injury Settlement

In many instances, accident victims require numerous doctor visits, medical and psychological treatment and extended time off of work before the scope and extent of their injuries are fully recognized and appreciated.  As the scope and extent of medical care and treatment increase, so does the potential settlement value of your case.  The first trick that many claims adjusters may utilize to reduce the payout on your case, is to rush the settlement process in order to close your claim before you receive all of the medical care that you need and deserve.

Ensure that You Receive Full Compensation – Don’t Accept Deliberate Underpayments

A claims adjuster also may intentionally send you less insurance money than your injuries and necessary treatment warrant.  In the overwhelming majority of cases, receiving and accepting payment from a liability insurance company means that you intend to enter a full and final settlement of your claims.  In other words, payment from an insurance company for injuries caused by its insured, often times represents full and complete payment on your injury claim.  After you have deposited or cashed the check, you will not be able to request additional compensation in the future—even if you later discover the amount you received is not enough to cover your medical bills and other accident-related expenses.

Take it Slow, But Not too Slow – When is the Right Time to Settle?

Many claims adjusters know that being out of work, while simultaneously accumulating medical debt, can be very stressful and intimidating.  Adjusters often develop various methods to stall the claims process, knowing—or at least hoping—that the longer the process takes, the more likely you are to accept a lesser amount of money to settle your claim.  In other cases, an adjuster also may hope that stalling or delaying a claim will cause an injured party to overlook a statute of limitation deadline, which could have the legal effect of barring a monetary recovery on your injury claim forever.

Level the Playing Field – Contact Zwick Law

Almost all insurance companies and adjusters want injured parties to avoid consulting with an experienced personal injury attorney—an attorney who will recognize their deceiving tricks and tactics.  The primary objective of a claims adjuster is to settle claims as inexpensively as possible, or even deny the claim in its entirety.  Throughout the settlement process, many adjusters will discourage you from consulting with an attorney, all while providing you with hope that they will work with you to settle the situation fairly (and, untimely, at a value much lower than you deserve).

If you or someone close to you is involved in an accident, the best thing to do is to contact a personal injury attorney immediately.  An experienced attorney, who is dedicated to being your advocate, will ensure that your claim is handled professionally, fully and fairly throughout the entire process – from injury to absolute compensation.  At Zwick Law, our experienced team takes pride in representing our clients diligently and aggressively through every stage of a claim.

With offices conveniently located in DuBois and Brookville, Pennsylvania, we are standing by to provide you with the peace of mind you deserve.  For questions concerning a personal injury claim, contact Matthew R. Zwick at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a free legal consultation and case analysis.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[1]

 

[1] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.  Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

FULL TORT v. LIMITED TORT INSURANCE COVERAGES

/in /by

If you have been involved in a motor vehicle accident, the difference between full tort and limited tort insurance coverage is a big one.  Tort coverage is one of the first topics that we discuss with clients and prospective clients when they come into our DuBois or Brookville office for a free and confidential consultation to discuss a personal injury claim resulting from an automobile accident.  In most instances, we find that many injured people either (1) do not know the difference between full tort and limited tort coverages, or (2) do not know which tort coverage they selected when purchasing their automobile insurance policy.  The difference, in most cases, is very significant.

full tort limited tort

In Pennsylvania, insurance companies offer their customers several options when selecting automobile insurance coverages.  One major option is: do you want full tort coverage or limited tort coverage.  It is very important to know the difference between the two options when making your decision.  If you are involved in an auto accident, and you select full tort coverage, then you are permitted to pursue and recover money for all of your injuries, which includes non-economic injuries and damages – i.e., pain and suffering, mental and psychological anguish, inconveniences, loss of enjoyment of daily life activities, etc.  However, if you select limited tort coverage, you forfeit and lose the ability to pursue and receive compensation for these non-economic damages.  This is a significant limitation.

Typically, insurance companies offer small and insignificant discounts on monthly insurance premiums for your selection of limited tort coverage.  While the selection of limited tort coverage can seem appealing at first, because it could immediately save you a few dollars on your monthly premium payment, choosing limited tort coverage may cost you significantly, both financially and legally, should you or a covered family member ever be involved in an automobile accident.

The Pitfalls of Limited Tort Coverage

Limited tort coverage permits a person injured in an automobile accident to only recover for out of pocket medical bills, wage loss, automobile repair costs, and other actual monetary or economic losses.  In other words, if you select limited tort coverage, you are giving up your right to pursue damages in a future personal injury case for pain and suffering and other similar damages before an accident ever occurs.

There is a limited exception to this general rule, which permits a person with limited tort coverage to pursue a claim for pain and suffering and other non-economic damages that are sustained in an automobile accident, if the person sustained bodily injuries that are deemed “serious.”  Serious injuries, however, are not always clearly defined or easily established.  Under Pennsylvania law, the term “serious injury” is generally described as “a personal injury resulting in death, serious impairment of body function or permanent serious disfigurement.”  In the majority of cases, however, difficulty arises in differentiating between a serious injury and a non-serious injury – which is anything but clear under the law.

The Benefits of Full Tort Coverage

At Zwick Law, we highly encourage and recommend that all Pennsylvania residents and drivers maintain full tort coverage on their automobile insurance policies.  The small amount of money that you could save on your monthly insurance premiums with limited tort coverage is slight compared to the costs that you could incur if you are involved in a vehicle accident.

In many cases, injuries that result from an automobile accident are not completely known until weeks, months, or even years after an accident.  Health and medical complications often arise  well after the accident and – without full tort coverage – you could be left responsible for treating injuries that resulted from a motor vehicle accident that were not your fault.  Full tort insurance coverage is one of the best forms of protection for your future and the future of cherished family members.  If you are involved in a serious automobile accident, it is very likely that you will lose more than you may have saved in reduced monthly premium payments.

So, when the time comes to purchase a new automobile insurance policy, or when you have an opportunity to review and change the terms of your existing policy with your insurance agent, discuss your tort coverage selection with your agent.  The bottom line is, if you want to ensure that you have preserved your right to pursue the full extent of your injuries and damages in a personal injury claim after a vehicle accident, you should make sure that you have full tort coverage on all of your automobile insurance policies.

For questions relating to full tort and limited tort options, please contact Matthew R Zwick, partner of Zwick Law, at (814) 371-6400 or mrz@zwick-law.com, to schedule a legal consultation.  At Zwick Law, we’re always here for you.[1]

 

[1] Disclaimer: The use of the Internet, Facebook and/or any other form of social media communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Time-sensitive information should be directed immediately to the office of Zwick Law at (814) 371-6400.

 

Schedule a Free Consultation

Mon-Fri 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM

(814) 371-6400

Message Us Now

Available 24/7

info@zwick-law.com

Or Call:
(814) 371-6400

DuBois, PA

Zwick & Zwick LLP
171 Beaver Drive
P.O. Box 1127
DuBois, PA 15801

View Map

Brookville, PA

Zwick & Zwick LLP
275 Main Street
Suite 2
Brookville, PA 15825

View Map

Ridgway, PA

Zwick & Zwick LLP
25 South Broad Street
Ridgway, PA 15853

View Map

Right Menu Icon
PROUDLY POWERED BY PARADYNAMIX