Automobile Accidents

Published on: January 12, 2017

Claims Against Florida Public Entities Are Subject to Strict Notice Requirements

Most people are familiar with the term “statute of limitations,” which refers to the amount of time that an accident victim has to file a lawsuit. Cases filed after the statute of limitations has expired will not be heard by a court, barring some extraordinary exception. In some cases, when a government or public entity is named as a defendant, an accident victim must also provide notice of the lawsuit to the state.

In Florida, victims seeking financial recovery from a government entity must follow strict guidelines, or their claims will not be heard. Specifically, notice of the claim must be provided to both the entity being sued as well as the Department of Financial Services within three years of the accident’s occurrence. An accident victim’s failure to comply with these requirements can result in the dismissal of an otherwise meritorious claim. A recent case in front of a New York appellate court illustrates how, even if a plaintiff’s late-filed case is ultimately allowed to proceed, it can still result in lengthy delays and unnecessary expenses.

Newcomb v. Middle Country School District

Newcomb, a 16-year-old boy, was struck by a hit-and-run driver while crossing the street near his school. Within a few days of the accident, Newcomb’s parents provided the school with the details of the accident. Shortly after the accident, police arrested the driver and began proceedings to criminally prosecute him.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 29, 2016

Plaintiff’s Chain-Reaction Accident Case Dismissed for Failure to Establish Necessary Elements

By Cecere Santana, PA

Earlier this fall, an appellate court issued a written opinion in a chain-reaction truck accident case brought by a man who was injured not in the original accident but in a subsequent accident caused by backed up traffic. In the case, Ready v. RWI Transportation, the court determined that the accident injuring the plaintiff was too far removed in both time and physical distance to be considered a foreseeable result of the defendant truck driver’s alleged negligence.

The Plaintiff Rear-Ends a Stopped Vehicle

The defendant truck driver caused an accident on the highway when he negligently changed lanes and struck another vehicle. As a result of the initial accident, traffic was slowed as emergency crews cleared the scene. This caused a significant back-up of traffic leading up to the accident.

The plaintiff was driving on the highway toward the accident, traveling at approximately 65-70 miles per hour, when he came upon the stopped traffic. The plaintiff failed to stop in time and ended up rear-ending a vehicle in the far right lane of travel. The plaintiff sustained serious injuries as a result of the accident, and he filed a personal injury lawsuit against the truck driver who allegedly caused the first accident, as well as that driver’s employer.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 19, 2016

Attorneys at Cecere Santana Share Driving Tips for Teens to Prevent Fatal Accidents

By Cecere Santana, PA

According to an October 12, 2016 CBS News article, the number of teenagers involved in deadly car crashes is rising for the first time in nearly a decade. In 2015, there was a 10-percent increase in teen driving deaths. “In fact, teenage drivers are more than one-and-a-half times more likely than adults to be involved in a deadly crash,” said personal injury attorney Erick Santana, a founding partner at Cecere Santana.

To help prevent fatal accidents involving teens, Santana and Cecere Santana co-founder Michael Cecere share the following three tips:

No. 1: Always wear your seat belt. “Of the teens who died in passenger vehicle crashes, approximately 55% were not wearing a seat belt at the time of the crash,” said Cecere. “Research shows that seat belts reduce serious crash-related injuries and deaths by about half.”

Continue reading →

Published on: September 16, 2016

Determining Which Statute of Limitations Applies in Personal Injury Cases

By Cecere Santana, PA

Under Florida law, all personal injury cases must be brought within a certain amount of time. Normally, this time frame is called the statute of limitations, and while there are some exceptions, the general rule is that a late-filed case cannot be heard by the courts, and the plaintiff will be without recourse for their injuries. While this concept is a straightforward one, determining which statute of limitations applies in a specific case is not always an easy task.

Different types of cases have different statutes of limitations. One of the strictest statutes of limitations is for medical malpractice cases. In many states, including in Florida, the statute of limitations in a medical malpractice case is two years. Compare that with the statute of limitations for general negligence cases, which is four years, and it is clear why it is important to determine at the outset which statute of limitations applies. Below is an example of one plaintiff’s experience bringing a traditional negligence case against a paramedic that initially was classified as a medical malpractice case.

Aldana v. Stillwagon: The Facts

Stillwagon, an on-duty paramedic, caused an accident when he struck Aldana’s vehicle after running a red light. At the time, Stillwater was on his way to the medical emergency. Aldana filed a personal injury lawsuit against Stillwater 17 months after the accident, arguing that his negligence in running the red light caused his injuries.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 8, 2016

Federal Court of Appeals Affirms $2.25 Million Verdict in Underinsured Motorist Case

By Cecere Santana, PA

The United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals recently released an opinion affirming a federal district court’s decision to award a Colorado accident victim a $2.25 million verdict against his auto insurance company. The plaintiff had initially sought only the $750,000 policy limit for the uninsured motorist coverage purchased from the defendant, but his successful claim that the defendant unreasonably denied his initial claim resulted in a judgment three times that amount. With the Tenth Circuit’s decision to affirm the lower court’s rulings, the plaintiff will receive the $2,250,000 he was awarded by the trial judge.

The Plaintiff Suffered a Serious Back Injury after He Was Rear-Ended by an Underinsured Driver

The plaintiff in the case of Etherton v. Owners Insurance Company was injured in a rear-end collision in December 2007. Although the damage to his vehicle was relatively minor, he suffered a back injury in the accident and underwent three back surgeries to repair disc damage in his spine. The plaintiff initially sought damages from the driver at fault for the accident and received the policy limit amount of $250,000 in compensation from the other driver’s insurance company.

The Plaintiff’s Initial Insurance Claim with the Defendant

The plaintiff’s insurance coverage with the defendant included uninsured/underinsured motorist protection and covered additional uncompensated expenses from an accident with an uninsured or underinsured driver up to a maximum of $1,000,000 (including any amount received from an underinsured motorist). The plaintiff made a claim under this coverage and requested $750,000, his policy limit minus the amount he’d received from the other driver. The defendant denied the plaintiff’s claim, offering only to pay $150,000, one-fifth of his requested amount. After negotiations stalled, the plaintiff filed a breach of contract lawsuit, seeking damages in the amount of his policy limits.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 25, 2016

The Importance of Honesty and Diligence in the Pre-Trial Discovery Phase of a Personal Injury Lawsuit

By Cecere Santana, PA

When an accident victim files a case against another motorist, the law requires that certain information be passed through what is called “pre-trial discovery.” This allows both sides to have an idea of the evidence the other party will use to prove or defend their claim. While not every piece of harmful or beneficial information must be passed in pre-trial discovery, generally all relevant evidence should be passed. If a court determines that a party is hiding evidence, or is otherwise not complying with the discovery process, the court can implement sanctions against that party.

Defense Verdict Reversed on Appeal, Based on Failure to Comply with Discovery Requirements

Earlier last month, an appellate court in West Virginia issued an opinion in a case that reversed a jury’s verdict in favor of the defendant after it came out that the defense failed to comply with pre-trial discovery rules. In the case, Phillips v. Stear, the court determined that the plaintiff was denied a fair opportunity to present his case when the defendant failed to disclose previously issued traffic citations and then denied knowledge of the citations at trial.

The accident giving rise to the case occurred when the plaintiff, a truck driver, was cut off by the defendant. According to the court documents, the defendant swerved in front of the plaintiff, made an obscene hand gesture, and then quickly applied the brakes. In response, the plaintiff tried to slow down as well, but he ended up losing control of the truck and crashing it off the side of the road.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 10, 2016

Determining Who Is at Fault in South Florida Multi-Vehicle Accidents

By Cecere Santana, PA

Determining fault in Miami vehicle accidents is not always as straightforward as it may seem. In some cases, the nature of the injuries sustained prevents those involved from accurately remembering what happened in the moments leading up to the accident. In other cases, so many vehicles are involved in an accident that it is difficult for authorities to determine who was at fault and who was merely an innocent victim of another’s negligent or reckless driving.

In most accidents involving serious injury or death, an accident reconstructionist is called in to help recreate the accident so that authorities have a better idea of what caused the accident. This can be very important for insurance issues as well as to help determine if any of the parties involved should face criminal charges for their role in the accident. While this is not a primary function of an accident reconstruction, it may also be used to help those injured in the accident obtain compensation for their injuries through a personal injury lawsuit.

After a serious accident, people injured as a result are left with more than just their physical injuries. They must also deal with the emotional aftermath. Add to the mix mounting medical expenses and time away from work, and it can be overwhelming. Thankfully, Florida law allows for those who suffer a serious injury in the wake of an accident to seek compensation though a personal injury lawsuit against the at-fault driver.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 17, 2016

Florida Court Upholds $1 Million Bad-Faith Verdict Against Insurance Company

By Cecere Santana, PA

In a case decided earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Florida upheld a jury’s $1 million verdict against an insurance company after it was determined that the insurance company acted in bad faith in not paying out on the plaintiff’s meritorious claim.

Fridman v. Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois: The Facts of the Case

The case arose after a 2007 accident involving the plaintiff and an uninsured motorist. In the wake of the accident, the plaintiff discovered that the other driver did not have insurance and sought to collect reimbursement for medical expenses and property damage from his own insurance company, Safeco. However, Safeco initially denied the claim and then failed to respond to any of the plaintiff’s attempts to follow up with the claim.

Eventually, the plaintiff filed a case against Safeco, citing the company’s bad faith in failing to settle the claim. Once that claim was filed, Safeco issued the plaintiff a payment of $50,000, which was the upper policy limit of the plaintiff’s uninsured motorist coverage. The plaintiff refused the settlement and opted to let the jury decide what the claim was worth. After a jury trial, the plaintiff was awarded an amount of $1 million.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 28, 2016

Punitive Damages in Florida Personal Injury Cases

By Cecere Santana, PA

When a Floridian is injured in an accident caused by another’s negligence, that accident victim usually will be entitled to seek compensation for their injuries through a Florida negligence lawsuit. There are several different types of damages awards that may be appropriate in any given situation, depending on the type of conduct that led to the accident, the severity of the victim’s injuries, and the effect the injuries will have on the victim’s life moving forward.

The most common type of personal injury damages award is called economic damages. These damages are meant to compensate the victim for the out-of-pocket expenses they incurred as a result of being involved in the accident. For example, economic damages in Florida include past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and decreased earning capacity.

Another type of damages award, which is also quite common, is non-economic damages. These awards are designed to help compensate for the less tangible but equally real injuries and losses they suffered as a result of the accident. For example, damages that seek to compensate an accident victim for their pain and suffering fall under this category.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 14, 2016

Alcohol-Related Accidents on Florida Roads

By Cecere Santana, PA

It should not come as a surprise to anyone that driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol is dangerous. In fact, it is so dangerous that all 50 states have agreed to make it illegal to operate a vehicle while under the effects of drugs or alcohol. Not only is drunk driving illegal under the the criminal statutes of Florida, but also it can also give rise to civil liability in certain situations in which a drunk driver causes an injury to another motorist, passenger, or pedestrian.

In Florida, a driver is per se “drunk” if they have a blood-alcohol content of .08 or greater. However, even if a driver’s blood-alcohol content is below that amount, they may still be in violation of the State’s ban on intoxicated driving if they have any quantity of alcohol in their system such that their “normal facilities are impaired.” This means that a driver can be considered under the influence even if they do not have a blood-alcohol content of .08 or greater. This same analysis applies to the use of prescription drugs. If a driver is impaired by the use of a prescription drug, they may still be found to have been intoxicated under the law.

This is important for those who have been injured by a driver whom they suspect was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The negligence laws of Florida allow for injured accident victims to seek compensation from those who are responsible for their injuries. However, before an injured party is entitled to compensation, that party must first prove that the other driver was negligent in the operation of their vehicle. One way to do this is to show that they were legally “drunk” or otherwise intoxicated at the time of the accident, and that their intoxication caused the accident.

Continue reading →