Florida Jury Orders State Farm to Pay Accident Victim $277,000

June 5, 2008

  • June 5, 2008 at 4:22 am
    Dread says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Here’s some tidbits about the plaintiff lawfirm:

    Mr. CARLOS Bodden is a member of The Florida Justice Association, The American Trial Lawyers Association and The Caribbean Bar Association and is the former Chairman of the Board for the Jamaicans of the Palm Beaches, a not for profit organization dedicated to providing employment opportunities, education and health assistance to impoverished citizens in the community.

    “I could not be happier for Ms. Bewsey,” Mr. Chandler, a veteran of more than 400 civil trials who specializes in personal injury and wrongful death litigation, added, “She is a hardworking student and we are proud to assist her and her family in alleviating the burdens associated with the car crash.”

    I’d be willing to bet this “hard-working student” isn’t even a citizen. Think about it: why would it take 6 years to squeeze out a verdict on this case that alleged “neck and back” injuries? Carriers aren’t usually willing to stick to a $5,000 offer and roll the dice at trial unless they think the case stinketh.

  • June 5, 2008 at 4:36 am
    KOB says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Whether claimant is a citizen or not, is irrelevant to the legitimacy of her claim. Unfortunately, there isn’t enough information in the news item to indicate State Farm’s basis for the offer. As anyone who ever read a personal injury complaint, every claimant has a “severe and permanent disabling injury”. I agree with Dread that it is unlikely that State Farm stuck to that offer, unless Pltf attorney was making an “equally ridiculous” demand for a dubious injury.

  • June 5, 2008 at 5:08 am
    And the winner is.... says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Bet she still only gets her $12,000 for the car & $5,000 for her injuries & that wonderful, magnanamous attorney gets the rest!

  • June 6, 2008 at 8:15 am
    Roger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    There is an insurance compant in Fl. that can no longer write insurance there because of their pratice of draging out claims for a period such as this.
    Their tatic was to offer a small settelment and if the person did not take it, they would play “hardball” and refuse to pay more, making the person take it through a very lengthly court trial.

    The large settelment is designed to punish insurers that will not make a fair offer up front as they should.

  • June 6, 2008 at 8:30 am
    Al says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sounds like sour grapes Roger. No insurance company in this day and age can afford to intentionally drag out making settlement. I’ve worked for several companies and not one of them ever even considered delay tactics. They did opt to dig in on questionable claims. Say what you will about State Farm, but it’s no fly by night operation.

  • June 6, 2008 at 8:41 am
    Roger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Al, Obviously you have not read about the “good hands people and boxing gloves.

    A term coined about an insurance company (one of the biggest) on how they take out the boxing gloves if their claimant refuses their pitifull offer!

    It is also plain to see that you are doing PR for an insurance company!

  • June 6, 2008 at 12:21 pm
    Wrong, Roger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It’s also plain to see that you do not work in the insurance industry. Al’s comments are correct.

  • June 6, 2008 at 5:45 am
    KOB says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I did hear of the decision by FL. to non-admit a certain carrier. I do not recall the specific reason, but that it was something similar to what Roger alleges. On the other hand, FL. is known as one of those judicial hellholes, and I suspect that a number of companies refuse to write business in that State. Their “No-fault” law was a joke, and their rulings on several tort issues were plaintiff oriented (in my opinion. Now, Roger should like at the other side of the coin in which Plaintiff attorneys make excessively ridiculous or ridiculously excessive claims, which drives up the insurance carriers cost to defend, with the hopes that the carrier gives in, instead of paying out so much $$$ in cost. Until we go to a “loser pays” or “offer against judgment” system, with some real teeth and some real risk for Plaintiffs and their attys to foot the defense and associated costs, if they do not prevail in court or gets an award of less than the insurer offered, we will never get to the “fair” or “middle ground” on claims/suits.
    *Hey, did anyone notice that the source of the article was the Plaintiff’s firm? What’s up with that?

  • December 5, 2008 at 2:52 am
    right, roger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    roger- that’s exactly what happened.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*