The Bill is not seeking to change the law, but to restore it to its initial status. A bad case came out(\”Kreiner\” case) a few years ago which made it harder for accident victims to be compensated for their injuries – even harder than the legislature intended when passing the law. The new bill seeks to retore the law to the pre-Kreiner status. This article is very misleading and doesn\’t present the facts. FYI, the ambulance chaser label is sickening and reflective of ignorance. When your parent or kid gets killed by a drunk driver, you\’ll think differently about attorneys.
In regards to country bumpkin, we could also send a flock of lawyers from Florida.
They are well trained in making the no-fault law a shambles. It will resemble what we have in Florida. An expensive system supporting both Tort & No-Fault.
Ok, you don\’t like ambulance chacer, must have hit a nerve. Only an attorney could stand up in court and lie with a perfectly straight face and still sleep at night. And Deb, I am not ignorant, I have 3 attorneys in my family!!
The plaintiff bar wants it both ways. They want lifetime unlimited medical benefits, and the right to sue. In a state that has such high unemployment and poor economics, the working class cannot afford the \”tax\” that this bill will impose if passed.
hello i agree we need to get the law back on track i was in a car accident as we speak. there shouldnt be threshold on general abilty to lead ones normal life we shouldnt have too prove an injury affects are lifes in away from things we did in the past to things we cant do now.what if we never did a whole lot in the past but theres stuff we want to do in the future that we can know longer do because of the accident its a law that needs revised bad. accident victims should only have to prove that there lifes have been seriously affected by the accident not from what we did in the past and cant do now. i read a case online to were a 70 year old lady broke ribs and lung damage and her case was dismissed because of this law thats ridiculous this law must be revised for michigan auto accident victims thank you.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
I hope it passes! Maybe some of the ambulance chasers in Calif would relocate to Michigan
The Bill is not seeking to change the law, but to restore it to its initial status. A bad case came out(\”Kreiner\” case) a few years ago which made it harder for accident victims to be compensated for their injuries – even harder than the legislature intended when passing the law. The new bill seeks to retore the law to the pre-Kreiner status. This article is very misleading and doesn\’t present the facts. FYI, the ambulance chaser label is sickening and reflective of ignorance. When your parent or kid gets killed by a drunk driver, you\’ll think differently about attorneys.
In regards to country bumpkin, we could also send a flock of lawyers from Florida.
They are well trained in making the no-fault law a shambles. It will resemble what we have in Florida. An expensive system supporting both Tort & No-Fault.
Ok, you don\’t like ambulance chacer, must have hit a nerve. Only an attorney could stand up in court and lie with a perfectly straight face and still sleep at night. And Deb, I am not ignorant, I have 3 attorneys in my family!!
The plaintiff bar wants it both ways. They want lifetime unlimited medical benefits, and the right to sue. In a state that has such high unemployment and poor economics, the working class cannot afford the \”tax\” that this bill will impose if passed.
an ambulance chaser is an ambulance chaser regardless if it\’s your kin in the ambulance or not.
and by the way whats a ambulance chaser?
hello i agree we need to get the law back on track i was in a car accident as we speak. there shouldnt be threshold on general abilty to lead ones normal life we shouldnt have too prove an injury affects are lifes in away from things we did in the past to things we cant do now.what if we never did a whole lot in the past but theres stuff we want to do in the future that we can know longer do because of the accident its a law that needs revised bad. accident victims should only have to prove that there lifes have been seriously affected by the accident not from what we did in the past and cant do now. i read a case online to were a 70 year old lady broke ribs and lung damage and her case was dismissed because of this law thats ridiculous this law must be revised for michigan auto accident victims thank you.