Insurer on hook for $150K for $8K chiropractor bill

In May 1995, Dawn Goodson’s car was rear-ended by a car insured by American Standard. Fourteen months later, in July 1996, Goodson and her children spent $8,000 on a chiropractor. Goodson submitted an insurance claim three months later.

You might imagine a wee bit of skepticism on the part of the insurance company. Goodson hadn’t gone through American Standard’s PPO, which meant that the bills were higher than they would have been; moreover, American Standard was skeptical that a chiropractor’s 1996 treatment for three individuals was medically necessary as a result of the 1995 accident, and asked for an independent medical evaluation. Nevertheless, American Standard, after initially offering to pay part of the bill, eventually paid the full medical bills in April 1998.

Not good enough: Goodson sued three months later, seeking damages for “emotional distress.” A jury awarded $75,000, and doubled it with $75,000 of punitive damages. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed Monday, holding that the eighteen-month delay in full payment was grounds for recovery of non-economic damages. You can guess what the eventual consequence will be for Colorado insurance rates now that an insurer is potentially subject to penalties of over 2000% for questioning a claim, but the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association paints it as a victory for the consumers who will now have to pay for the meritless claims insurers will pay out of fear of lawsuit. (Howard Pankratz, “Court says tardy insurers liable for emotional damages without proof of loss”, Denver Post, May 4; Karen Abbott, “Insurer is ordered to pay family $300,000”, Rocky Mountain News, May 4; Goodson v. American Standard Insurance Company of Wisconsin opinion).

Iran tort judgment: US owes $600M

A cottage industry has arisen in the plaintiffs’ bar seeking huge damages in US courts against foreign governments for what, reasonable people can agree, are often despicable acts. The plaintiffs and press (and sometimes the courts and Congress) express surprise when the State Department protests or otherwise intervenes against the suits. The State Department’s concerns are perhaps best explained by the risk of reciprocal suits and, indeed, it appears our neighbors have caught on: a Tehran court issued a $600 million “verdict” against the United States for the US’s role in the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s. (Reuters, Apr. 28; IRNA, Apr. 28).

“Stoned Skater Can Sue County”

Via Legal Reader (May 3): a California court of appeals has reinstated 17-year-old Angelo Seaver’s suit against Santa Cruz county, which a trial judge had thrown out. While stoned on pot one moonless night Seaver had gone skateboarding in a public park after closing and crashed into a gate. The “panel found that because there were no signs, reflectors or lighting to help Seaver see the gate, the county created a ‘dangerous condition of public property.'” The county could not rely on the defense of assumption of risk, the court ruled, “because Seaver was riding his skateboard for transportation, not to perform stunts”. (Peter Blumberg, San Francisco Daily Journal, May 3, not online; Angelo M. Seaver v. County of Santa Cruz, unpublished opinion, Apr. 30 (PDF))(more personal-responsibility cases).

Madison County: Ms. Howell’s two hats

In an article about the controversial Lucent class action settlement ($84 million for the lawyers, $8 million for the class; see Apr. 5) the St. Louis Post-Dispatch talks with Joy Howell, spokeswoman for lead class counsel Stephen Tillery, who’s among Madison County’s most prominent class-action lawyers. Later in the piece it emerges that Ms. Howell “also serves as a spokeswoman for the Coalition to Preserve Access to Justice”, a group that vehemently opposes the reform-minded Class Action Fairness Act on behalf of “more than 80 national consumer, environmental and civil rights groups”. Hmmm. (Trisha L. Howard, “Nixon backs state role in class action suits”, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Apr. 3). And the local press is casting a skeptical eye on what the Post-Dispatch calls “the strange little courthouse in Edwardsville” (Illinois) and the doings of Judge Nicholas C. Byron in particular (see “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad Madison County”, Apr. 22) (“Madison County: What’s the judge hiding?” (editorial), St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 1; Brian Brueggemann, “Judge Byron endures hot seat”, Belleville News-Democrat, May 3; “‘Judicial hellhole’ deepens with law firm’s banishment” (editorial), Bloomington Pantagraph, Apr. 27). Last month “Byron ordered a newspaper reporter to leave the courtroom Monday when [attorney Rex] Carr and Tillery began arguing about the apparently sensitive issue of how much money the firm has earned.” (Brian Brueggemann, “Class-action lawyers fight over money”, Belleville News-Democrat, Apr. 11, and how’s that for a quotidian headline?). Finally, visions of sugar plums seem to have gone a-glimmering for class action attorney Judy Cates, of columnist-suing fame, when a Belleville jury rejected her lawsuit demanding $300 million from Allstate because it does not reimburse its auto policyholders after crashes for the decline in the resale value of their fully repaired cars. According to defense attorney H. Sinclair “Rod” Kerr, the lead plaintiffs, Michael and Tiffany Sims of East St. Louis, Ill., “decided to sue only after a relative called their attention to a newspaper ad placed by Cates’ law firm seeking plaintiffs against Allstate.” (Robert Goodrich, “Jury rejects class-action suit over car repairs”, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Apr. 29).

Calif. to lawyers: yes, you have to drop baseless cases

Good news dept.: Although it’s still very, very difficult to prevail in a case of malicious prosecution against someone who’s wrongfully sued you, in California it’s now slightly less difficult than it used to be. Last month “the state Supreme Court, in a case of first impression, ruled unanimously that lawyers could be sued for malicious prosecution if they continue to pursue a case after learning it isn’t supported by probable cause.” (Mike McKee, “Pursue a Bad Case, Risk Getting Sued for Malicious Prosecution”, The Recorder, Apr. 21). George Wallace and David Giacalone comment, and the latter tells a personal war story.

Milberg Weiss breakup

Lyle Roberts notes that Milberg Weiss (see Feb. 4, Jan. 11, Jul. 1, Apr. 18, 2002, other earlier posts) has quietly completed its long-announced breakup. While one of the successor firms keeps a variant of the Milberg Weiss name, the milberg.com domain name is relegated to an announcement of the split. (Jonathan Birchall, “Tough kids split into two gangs”, Financial Times, May 3). UPDATE: more press coverage links at The 10b-5 Daily.

“Shouldn’t have been allowed on” roller coaster

“A 55-year-old man who died after falling out of a roller coaster shouldn’t have been allowed on the ride because he was heavy and had cerebral palsy, his mother said Sunday.” (“Family Says Man Shouldn’t Have Been On Ride”, NBC30.com, May 2). “Park officials said Mr. [Stanley J.] Mordarsky was able to board the roller coaster by himself, according to broadcast reports on Sunday. The park, under the federal Americans With Disabilities Act, must allow disabled people on rides if they can get in the rides by themselves, the officials said.” (“Man Dies After Fall From Roller Coaster”, AP/New York Times, May 3). (More: Boston Globe). For other instances in which amusement park patrons may have been killed by their rights, see Oct. 29, 2001 (obesity) and Aug. 31, 1999 (mental retardation).

Number one in donations (and so civically engaged)

In this campaign cycle, “once again, lawyers as a group are not only the largest donors of any single profession tracked, they are also the most consistent, campaign watchers say. As of March 1, when the latest Federal Election Commission figures were available, the legal profession had contributed more than $65 million to federal campaigns since Jan. 1, 2003, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. … ‘It looks like lawyers are making a strong effort to make up for the lack of soft money,’ says CRP spokesman Steve Weiss.” Washington, D.C., attorney William Canfield, who chairs the ABA?s Standing Committee on Election Law, explains that lawyers “are so much more civically engaged than most parts of society”. (Susan Kostal, “Spreading the Money Around”, ABA Journal, May).

Unlawful to test for mad cow

A story already widely discussed on weblogs, but too crazy to let drop: Japan will not allow beef imports from the U.S. unless each animal is tested for mad cow, and Kentucky cattleman John Stewart of Creekstone Farm would be happy to oblige in order to sell his products there. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, however, supported by most of the beef industry, has ruled that he may not: the department does not intend to set up a testing program itself, and private testing is unlawful. “They’ve told us if we attempt to buy those test kits and use them, they are going to put me in jail,” Stewart said. (David Kerley, “Mad Cow, Madder Cattleman”, ABCNews.com, May 2 (aired on Apr. 18))

Lawyer: school should have secured bus windows against opening

In Indianapolis, Raul Gonzalez IV, 16 and developmentally disabled, “died after he stuck his head out of a [school] bus window and struck a tree last fall. The bus driver was steering to avoid an injured raccoon”. Now his mother, Irma Garcia, has filed a tort claim notice against the city and Perry Township schools on a variety of negligence theories. Her lawyer, Robert York, said in particular that the fatality could have been averted “if the bus’s windows had been blocked from opening more than a few inches”. The article makes no mention of what such a recommendation might mean for the safety of school bus passengers in other situations, such as emergency evacuations. (Vic Ryckaert, “Perry Schools may be sued in bus accident”, Indianapolis Star, Apr. 16)(& letter to the editor, Jun. 22).