Car Accident Attorneys at Piccuta Law Group Settle Car Crash Lawsuit for $100,000 Policy Limits After Rejecting Insurance Company’s Lowball Offer
Car Accident Attorneys at Piccuta Law Group Settle Car Crash Lawsuit for $100,000 Policy Limits After Rejecting Insurance Company’s Lowball Offer
The car accident attorneys at the Piccuta Law Group recently settled a lawsuit for the full insurance policy covering the at-fault driver. That amount was $100,000 and was recovered from State Farm Insurance Company. Our Monterey car accident lawyers were required to file a lawsuit to force State Farm to pay this amount.
State Farm initially offered $39,000 to settle the client’s case. After our attorneys demanded the full $100,000 policy limits, State Farm then offered $45,000. State Farm then advised that this was the most it would pay and that other attorneys would accept this amount. Our car accident attorneys then filed a lawsuit refusing to take less than the full amount our client deserved.
The lawsuit was filed in Orange County Superior Court. The car accident involved the husband of a former Monterey resident who was injured while driving in Costa Mesa, California. The Case was filed on August 6, 2020 and entitled Doyle v. Rivas and Garcia (Case # 30-2020-01154160). The case was dismissed on December 9, 2020 after the parties reached a final settlement.
Details of the Motor Vehicle Accident
On August 3, 2019, the firm’s client was driving westbound at approximately 35 m.p.h. on Victoria Street near the intersection at Pacific Avenue in Costa Mesa, California. At the time, another driver was driving a Honda Pilot eastbound on Victoria Street and approaching the firm’s client from the opposite direction. Then and there, the driver suddenly swerved into oncoming traffic and into the lane of the client. This caused a head-on collision at 30–40 m.p.h. Because of the sudden nature of the other driver’s erratic behavior, the firm’s client was unable to avoid the crash.
After the collision, the other driver stated to the investigating officer that he was tired and sleep deprived. In fact, the driver went so far as to admit that he “dozed off” while driving. As such, liability of the other driver was established. The driver was negligent in that he failed to use reasonable care in the operation of the vehicle. In addition, the driver was negligent per se for violating the California Vehicle Code.
The investigating officer concluded that the driver was at fault for the collision in violation of CVC § 22107, which states that “[n]o person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.”
The Injuries Sustained by the Client in the Car Accident
Upon impact, the airbag in the client’s vehicle inflated. The client’s head snapped forward with such violent force that his nose was broken. The client lost consciousness as a result of the crash. The next thing the client recalled is that his car was against the curb facing the opposite direction and that people were attempting to extract him from his vehicle. The client also noticed that his face was bleeding and that he felt a tremendous amount of pain in his left arm. Emergency medical responders soon arrived at the scene and began providing care. Upon arrival, they discovered the client’s blood spattered throughout the vehicle. The client was then taken by ambulance to the Emergency Department of a nearby hospital.
The client arrived at the emergency room complaining of an acute head injury and left forearm pain. Upon physical examination, the client exhibited a swollen nose and left elbow tenderness. A CT scan of his head and x-rays of his left forearm were ordered to help determine the full extent of his injuries. Findings from the CT scan revealed a right nasal bone fracture. X-rays of the client’s forearm showed a displaced fracture involving the radius bone. The client’s broken arm was placed in a splint and sling and he was told to follow up with an orthopedic surgeon.
Five days later, the client met with an orthopedic surgeon with the complaint of a left radius fracture. X-rays of the left forearm and wrist confirmed the fracture and that the bones were misaligned. The orthopedic surgeon recommended an open reduction internal fixation surgery that would require hardware to realign the broken bone. The client scheduled the surgery.
On August 12, 2019, the client underwent an open reduction internal fixation surgery to repair his left radius shaft fracture. The client was taken to the operating room where general anesthesia was administered. During the surgical procedure, a titanium plate and six screws were implanted to achieve alignment of his broken arm bone. After the surgery, anesthesia was reversed, and the client was taken to the recovery room in stable condition. The client then had a series of post-operative appointments and therapy sessions.
Despite the successful surgery, the client still experienced symptoms from his injury. This included feeling pain and sensations in his arm with weather changes and cold temperatures. His arm was also stiff and weaker than before. The client was also left with a prominent scar on his arm from the surgical incision.
The Lowball Offer from the Insurance Company
Even with the serious injuries suffered by the client, the insurance company refused to pay a fair amount to compensate the client. Instead, they only made settlement offers in the amounts of $39,000 and $45,000. This is despite having $100,000 in available insurance coverage to compensate the client.
Insurance companies often make lowball offers on cases to see if the attorneys on the other side will do the extra work to obtain the full amount.
Insurance companies often make lowball offers on cases to see if the attorneys on the other side will do the extra work to obtain the full amount. Often times, an attorney may take a quick settlement to avoid doing extra work. Our car accident attorneys will not allow a client to be short-changed or taken advantage of. If an insurance company will not pay a fair amount to settle a claim or case, our attorneys will file a lawsuit and take the case to trial as needed.
Our car accident attorneys will not allow a client to be short-changed or taken advantage of.
This is exactly what our attorneys did in this case. Our attorneys filed a lawsuit, advanced it and obtained the full amount of the insurance money available. By doing so, the client received approximately six times more than he would have if our attorneys settled the case for the initial offer.
Contact a Monterey Car Accident Attorney Today
If you or a loved one was involved in a motor vehicle accident, hire a skilled injury attorney from the Piccuta Law Group today. Our Monterey personal injury attorneys will fight the insurance companies to make sure that you get every dollar you deserve. We do not charge a fee unless we recover for you and advance all costs. An initial consultation is free. Contact us today to discuss your personal injury case or car accident claim.
About the author: The content on this page was written by California civil rights lawyer and Monterey personal injury attorney Charles “Tony” Piccuta. Piccuta graduated with honors from Indiana University-Maurer School of Law in Bloomington, Indiana (Ranked Top 35 US News & World Report 2018). Piccuta took and passed the State bars of Arizona, California, Illinois and Nevada (all on the first try). He actively practices throughout California and Arizona. He is a winning trial attorney that regularly handles serious personal injury cases and civil rights lawsuits. He has obtained six and seven figure verdicts in both state and federal court. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers for six years straight. He is AV Rated by Martindale Hubble. He is a member of the Consumer Attorneys of California, American Association for Justice, National Police Accountability Project, Arizona Association of Justice, Maricopa County Bar Association and Scottsdale Bar Association, among other organizations.
Disclaimer: The information on this web site is attorney advertising and is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Reading and relying upon the content on this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact our law firm for a free consultation and to discuss your specific case and issues.
References:
[1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH§ionNum=22107
