Having been involved in handling these types of cases for so many years, this question is at the heart of many discussions I've had. The answer is as simple as the problem is sad and it all boils down to one word: "PROFIT."
Hospitals make a larger profit when a baby is delivered vaginally than when it's delivered by c-section. In fact, at many hospitals, they lose money on c-sections. The problem is, often times, as part of a child's delivery, they may get stuck in the birth canal, or have problems that are depriving them of oxygen. The doctors know that c-sections are usually the best response to a child that is in danger. The problem is, because the hospital they work at is focusing on the economic bottom line, the doctors are often under pressure to try and avoid doing a c-section. While the doctors leave the baby in distress and hope a vaginal delivery will work, they wait while the baby can't breathe and is exposed to severe brain damage that can lead to cerebral palsy. Or if they are stuck in the birth canal, they are vulnerable to a severe arm/shoulder injuries if the doctor pulls too hard on their arm.
You can learn more about this topic by going to http://ostrofflaw.com/pennsylvania-birth-injury-lawyers.htm
Monday, March 9, 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Case of the Week
Facts: Our client was severely injured by a drunk driver. In the collision, his clavicle was crushed and required multiple surgeries. The intoxicated driver, who was at fault for this accident, had only $15,000 liability coverage, which are the benefits we would pursue against a driver who was at fault for an accident. Fortunately for our client, the car he was driving had very substantial under-insured motorist benefits totaling $500,000. This means that if the value of this case is worth in excess of the insurance on the vehicle at fault, he can go back to his company for what are known as under-insured motorist benefits (UIM) which insured you against being injured by someone with inadequate insurance. It was clear that the value of our client’s case was worth in excess of the $500,000 in insurance on his policy but his company refused to offer the full amount.
Once an insurance company is on notice of a UIM claim and a claimant attorney’s makes it clear that the case is worth the total amount of that insurance or more, the insurance company has a responsibility to pay those benefits within a reasonable period of time. If the company fails to do this and a verdict or arbitration award is received in excess of the available insurance, the claimant can actually receive the full amount of the award or verdict rather than the limited insurance.
In this case, Jon Ostroff obtained an arbitration award on behalf of his client of $1.3 million dollars. Mr. Ostroff’s client immediately received the full $500,000 policy limit or received it within 30 days, but within the next six months, the claimant received most of the $800,000 that was awarded to him in excess of the $500,000 available under the applicable policy. Mr. Ostroff’s client was very tempted to accept a $350,000 offer from the insurance company made just a day or two before the arbitration commenced. Mr. Ostroff strongly urged his client to refrain from accepting that amount as he was confident that they could receive an arbitration award well in excess of the $500,000 policy limits and potentially receive more than that amount. Luckily, Mr. Ostroff’s client took Mr. Ostroff’s advice, and agreed to present the case at arbitration where they received an amount that was multiples of the amount offered prior to arbitration.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Case of the Week
Facts: Our client was severely injured by a drunk driver. In the collision, his clavicle was crushed and required multiple surgeries. The intoxicated driver, who was at fault for this accident, had only $15,000 liability coverage, which are the benefits we would pursue against a driver who was at fault for an accident. Fortunately for our client, the car he was driving had very substantial under-insured motorist benefits totaling $500,000. This means that if the value of this case is worth in excess of the insurance on the vehicle at fault, he can go back to his company for what are known as under-insured motorist benefits (UIM) which insured you against being injured by someone with inadequate insurance. It was clear that the value of our client’s case was worth in excess of the $500,000 in insurance on his policy but his company refused to offer the full amount.
Once an insurance company is on notice of a UIM claim and a claimant attorney’s makes it clear that the case is worth the total amount of that insurance or more, the insurance company has a responsibility to pay those benefits within a reasonable period of time. If the company fails to do this and a verdict or arbitration award is received in excess of the available insurance, the claimant can actually receive the full amount of the award or verdict rather than the limited insurance.
In this case, Jon Ostroff obtained an arbitration award on behalf of his client of $1.3 million dollars. Mr. Ostroff’s client immediately received the full $500,000 policy limit or received it within 30 days, but within the next six months, the claimant received most of the $800,000 that was awarded to him in excess of the $500,000 available under the applicable policy. Mr. Ostroff’s client was very tempted to accept a $350,000 offer from the insurance company made just a day or two before the arbitration commenced. Mr. Ostroff strongly urged his client to refrain from accepting that amount as he was confident that they could receive an arbitration award well in excess of the $500,000 policy limits and potentially receive more than that amount. Luckily, Mr. Ostroff’s client took Mr. Ostroff’s advice, and agreed to present the case at arbitration where they received an amount that was multiples of the amount offered prior to arbitration.
Limitted Tort Insurance Policy
Question:
I suffered from injuries in an automobile accident caused by another person and I selected the limited tort option on my auto insurance policy. I’ve already spoken with the insurance adjuster on the other person’s car and he tells me because I selected limited tort, I cannot make a claim for my pain and suffering. Is this correct?
Answer:
Remember that insurance adjusters are employed by companies who profit from scaring you away from making a claim where they would otherwise be responsible for paying you. Many of those who contact us with a limited tort policy are under the impression that they are not able to make a recovery and we find otherwise. Sometimes it’s a matter of your injury being serious enough that you fall into what’s called the “serious injury exception” that applies to limited tort. Other times there are automatic exceptions such as if you were not in a regular private passenger vehicle when the accident occurred or if you were injured by a drunk driver. Finally, even if your injury was not serious when you first attempted to make a claim with the insurance company, perhaps it has become more serious because it has not improved and you’re still receiving medical treatment after many months.
Whatever the case may be, it is always worth your while to contact our law office to see if you’re entitled to a recovery, even if you chose the limited tort option. Many clients are surprised to learn we are able to help them when they have been told otherwise by their insurance adjuster or even other law firms. It’s worth picking up the phone to make one simple call to our office and in a short while, we can provide you with our expert opinion as to whether or not we can help you.
I suffered from injuries in an automobile accident caused by another person and I selected the limited tort option on my auto insurance policy. I’ve already spoken with the insurance adjuster on the other person’s car and he tells me because I selected limited tort, I cannot make a claim for my pain and suffering. Is this correct?
Answer:
Remember that insurance adjusters are employed by companies who profit from scaring you away from making a claim where they would otherwise be responsible for paying you. Many of those who contact us with a limited tort policy are under the impression that they are not able to make a recovery and we find otherwise. Sometimes it’s a matter of your injury being serious enough that you fall into what’s called the “serious injury exception” that applies to limited tort. Other times there are automatic exceptions such as if you were not in a regular private passenger vehicle when the accident occurred or if you were injured by a drunk driver. Finally, even if your injury was not serious when you first attempted to make a claim with the insurance company, perhaps it has become more serious because it has not improved and you’re still receiving medical treatment after many months.
Whatever the case may be, it is always worth your while to contact our law office to see if you’re entitled to a recovery, even if you chose the limited tort option. Many clients are surprised to learn we are able to help them when they have been told otherwise by their insurance adjuster or even other law firms. It’s worth picking up the phone to make one simple call to our office and in a short while, we can provide you with our expert opinion as to whether or not we can help you.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Suing your own insurance company
Question:
Last week, my husband was driving us home from a church function late at night and fell asleep at the wheel. I sustained severe injuries when I was thrown through the front windshield. Can I receive any compensation for my pain and suffering? It’s so strange to “sue” my husband.
Answer:
Not only can you receive a recovery for your pain and suffering, but all of your medical benefits and lost wages should be covered as well up to the amount of the available insurance.
Of course it may feel awkward to make a claim against your husband. However, if your car was damaged in the accident and your insurance company is being relied upon to fix it, your insurance premium is most likely going to be impacted anyway, based on the fact that they will be called upon to pay for the damage to the vehicle.
Your insurance cannot and will not raise your premiums by more if you make a bodily injury claim. While technically, this claim is against your husband, it’s really between you as a claimant and your insurance company. You bought your liability coverage through your insurance company to insure you and anyone else from being injured as a result of your negligence. In other words, if any of you were at fault driving one of your vehicles and injured someone you don’t know in an accident, this coverage protects you and your family from litigation. However, this coverage also protects family members who are injured as a result of the negligence of another family member.
Rather than viewing this as a case between you and your husband, Ostroff Injury Law recommends you view it as a case between you and your insurance company. You are entitled to be compensated for your pain and suffering, loss of wages, to have your medical bills paid, whether it was your husband who caused your injuries or somebody you don’t know.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Case of the Week
The Facts:
Our client was severely injured by a drunk driver. In the collision, his clavicle was crushed and required multiple surgeries. The intoxicated driver, who was at fault for this accident, had only $15,000 liability coverage. Liability coverage is the benefit we would pursue against a driver who was at fault for an accident. Fortunately for our client, the car he was driving had very substantial under-insured motorist benefits (UIM) totaling $500,000. This means that if the value of the case is worth in excess of the insurance on the vehicle at fault, he can go back to his company for coverage from being injured by someone with inadequate insurance. It was clear that the value of our client’s case was worth in excess of the $500,000 in insurance on his policy, but his company refused to offer the full amount.
Once an insurance company is on notice of an UIM claim and a claimant’s attorney makes it clear that the case is worth the total amount of that insurance or more, the insurance company has a responsibility to pay those benefits within a reasonable period of time. If the company fails to do this and a verdict or arbitration award is received in excess of the available insurance, the claimant can actually receive the full amount of the award or verdict rather than the limited insurance.
The Outcome:
In this case, Pennsylvania attorney Jon Ostroff obtained an arbitration award on behalf of his client of $1.3 million dollars. Mr. Ostroff’s client immediately received the full $500,000 policy limit, but within the next six months, the claimant received most of the $800,000 that was awarded to him in excess of the $500,000 available under the applicable policy.
Mr. Ostroff’s client was very tempted to accept a $350,000 offer from the insurance company made just a day or two before the arbitration commenced. Mr. Ostroff strongly urged his client to refrain from accepting that amount as he was confident that they could receive an arbitration award well in excess of the $500,000 policy limits and potentially receive more than that amount. Luckily, Mr. Ostroff’s client took his advice, and agreed to present the case at arbitration where they received an amount that was multiples of the amount offered prior to arbitration.
Our client was severely injured by a drunk driver. In the collision, his clavicle was crushed and required multiple surgeries. The intoxicated driver, who was at fault for this accident, had only $15,000 liability coverage. Liability coverage is the benefit we would pursue against a driver who was at fault for an accident. Fortunately for our client, the car he was driving had very substantial under-insured motorist benefits (UIM) totaling $500,000. This means that if the value of the case is worth in excess of the insurance on the vehicle at fault, he can go back to his company for coverage from being injured by someone with inadequate insurance. It was clear that the value of our client’s case was worth in excess of the $500,000 in insurance on his policy, but his company refused to offer the full amount.
Once an insurance company is on notice of an UIM claim and a claimant’s attorney makes it clear that the case is worth the total amount of that insurance or more, the insurance company has a responsibility to pay those benefits within a reasonable period of time. If the company fails to do this and a verdict or arbitration award is received in excess of the available insurance, the claimant can actually receive the full amount of the award or verdict rather than the limited insurance.
The Outcome:
In this case, Pennsylvania attorney Jon Ostroff obtained an arbitration award on behalf of his client of $1.3 million dollars. Mr. Ostroff’s client immediately received the full $500,000 policy limit, but within the next six months, the claimant received most of the $800,000 that was awarded to him in excess of the $500,000 available under the applicable policy.
Mr. Ostroff’s client was very tempted to accept a $350,000 offer from the insurance company made just a day or two before the arbitration commenced. Mr. Ostroff strongly urged his client to refrain from accepting that amount as he was confident that they could receive an arbitration award well in excess of the $500,000 policy limits and potentially receive more than that amount. Luckily, Mr. Ostroff’s client took his advice, and agreed to present the case at arbitration where they received an amount that was multiples of the amount offered prior to arbitration.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
2008 Year End Letter
2008 has been a very difficult year for so many of us.
- Our economy is struggling
- Too many people are out of work
- Young men and women serving our country are losing their lives at war
Even in a difficult year, I believe it’s critical to take at least a few minutes to be thankful for the good things that are still in our lives.
Despite all that’s troubling our nation and many of us individually, what makes our country great is that we never give up. Faith is the key to overcoming adversity. This is the time of year to exercise our faith and to be thankful for all that is good in our lives.
My wife Amy and I are thankful that we and our kids are in good health and thriving.
- Our oldest daughter Adrienne is excelling in her first year of college.
- Our middle son Ethan is as happy as we have ever seen him at his new school
- Our youngest son Charlie loves being a first grader and actually looks forward to doing his “homework.”
We are also thankful that my father has overcome kidney failure and was blessed to receive a new kidney this year. It is functioning normally and he is doing very well.
Amy and I are thankful that we are lucky enough to work with a great staff, filled with caring, compassionate people who feel like extended family to us, and treat our clients like they would treat members of their own families.
We are thankful to know that we live in a country that has overcome difficult times before and will overcome them again.
And of course, we are thankful to be nearing the end of another year filled with successful outcomes for those that have trusted us. As always, we are deeply grateful for the faith our clients have shown in us. We never take this for granted!
We hope your holiday season is filled with peace, faith and love, and that perhaps this time next year, our country on the whole will be on its way to a strong recovery that will bring prosperity to all of us.
It is our hope that each day that passes in 2009 on this calendar will bring you nothing but good things.
Fondly,
Jon Ostroff
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
