Personal Injury Case Articles
- This Opinion Maybe the Most Important Decision for California Personal Injury Attorneys and Their Injured Clients!
The Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. decision may be the most important decision for California personal injury attorneys and their injured clients. The California Court of Appeals reinstated the collateral source rule’s guarantee that plaintiffs are entitled to the full billed value of their medical bills and not the discounted payment from their private health insurance carrier. ssdi payment calculator – In this case, a San Diego, CA woman won her appeal to have $130,000 of her jury verdict reinstated after the Court discounted the verdict by the reductions obtained by her health insurance.
- The Third Appellate District Becomes the Latest Appellate Court to Uphold the Collateral Source Rule That Negligent Defenders Should Not Benefit from Injured People Who Have the Foresight to Purchase Health Insurance.
The California Court of Appeals for the Third Appellate District recently ruled in King v. Willmett that the collateral source rule bars the reduction of jury verdicts based upon reduced amounts paid by the injured person’s health insurance company. The rule prevents the courts from rewarding negligent defendants from benefiting from the foresight of injured people who purchased and then used health insurance to pay for their medical care arising from an accident. This is a very important decision benefiting California injury victims. It overrules the argument made by insurance defense attorneys in the Nishihama and Haniff cases. Schedule a free consultation with an experienced disability attorney or representative in the Phoenix area, and all of Arizona. Call (888)939-4692 or via the web https://disabilityhelpgroup.org. We would be honored to answer your questions or represent your case.
- Get Out of Red Light Camera Tickets with This California Appellate Court Case–People v. Khaled
In People v. Khaled, the California Court of Appeals ruled that the hearsay rule applies to photographs and videotapes used by police agencies to enforce red lights at intersections monitored by cameras. In order to substantiate the photographs, prosecutors must call witnesses who can lay a foundation for when, where, and how the photograph is taken in order for it to be introduced into evidence. Further, laying such a foundation is necessary to establish that the photograph was not altered by Photoshop or some other method.