You've gotta be an idiot. Put the joint out in your ashtray go back and take another law class. Specifically insurance law cheesewiz. You atty's think you can sue f/ everything, don't you?
Quote: "Signing a waiver to release the insurance company does not release the driver from civil litigation for amounts over and above the coverage amount."
This is correct. But where is that evident here? $59,000 isn't a policy limit. Most policies are 25/50, 50/100, 100/300, 250/500. Maybe in CA they have 59/118. If this is the case then the policy is maxed out and the poster is w/in the rights to sue the insured.
Quote: "Don't even attempt to imply that insurance adjusters don't take advantage of the injured party's situation in order to force a settlement for far less than if litigated."
What does this have to do w/ the price of tea in China? I take it back, you're the one who needs to put the joint out in the ashtray cause your in la la land honey. If the poster feels he was co-erced as you keep insisting he was, even though he has said nothing about that, then he would have a case.
So how, praytell, was the poster coerced into signing this agreement as you keep insisting met4?
Met4: The arguement here is if the poster has a civil case against the insured, not if the poster was coerced into signing a release. I appreciate you trying to keep bringing it up but let's stick to the facts
First of all, please post here the exact language of the poster's coverage policy.
Then post here your findings on Tort law.
Next, I suggest a thorough discussion with a personal injury attorney licensed to practice in the state where the original poster lives.
Then, once you've done all of that come back and explain exactly what the waiver the original poster signed said, word for word.
Now, when you've completed all of that you MAY be competent to prooffer a legal opinion based on the laws of the state where the poster lives.
Quote: "First of all, please post here the exact language of the poster's coverage policy."
I don't know it and neither do you. But it isn't $59,000. I'll bet my house on that junior.
Quote: "Then post your findings on tort law"
Why waste my time. Post your own findings if you wish. I know when an insurance company has ANYONE sign a release, the insureds name is on it if policy limits aren't maxed out. After all this is why one has insurance.
Quote: "Next, I suggest a thorough discussion with a personal injury attorney licensed to practice in the state where the original poster lives."
No thanks, I deal w/ them everyday. Just like you, they all think they can sue and win. They could care less about the law. Only how much money they potentially can make from a client.
Quote: "Then, once you've done all of that come back and explain exactly what the waiver the original poster signed said, word for word."
Exactly, now we're getting somewhere. My post from 12:04 today:
"Every release I've seen names all the parties and not just the insurance company. ****So it would depend on who is on the release and what it says.**** (remember this part sparky, or can't you read) If an insurance company had him sign it I would guarantee it had the insureds name on it to protect him from future litigation as well."
Quote: "Now, when you've completed all of that you MAY be competent to prooffer a legal opinion based on the laws of the state where the poster lives."
How do you prooffer a legal opinion? Sounds like bad gas to me.
What, you mean to imply the insurance company that had him sign the release is going to be dumb enough to have people sign releases that don't hold up to CA law? Is this what you're saying? They have legal teams to make sure their documents are legal in every state they operate in, including CA. What planet do you actually live on. I think the breeze from Belize has affected your thinking.
Why don't you, the poster, and met4, hold hands and skip all the way to courthouse and file that suit now. After all, you can sue anybody f/ anything. Who knows, I may be the adjustor on the other side nibbling on a shark cartilage f/ breakfast. (sharks have no bones in their body you know).
Chevy, go see an attorney.
I'm done trying to educate this fool. :rolleyes:
Let's settle this once and for all.
The carrier for the defendant driver settled the poster's injury claim for $59,000. The carrier as a rule would have the poster sign a release that forever releases from liability the insurance carrier, the driver of the car, and the owner of the car.
Poster can no longer file a civil action against the defendant for injuries/damages from the accident.
However, the criminal court can order the defendant to pay criminal restitution to the poster that is above and beyond anything that the defendant's insurance carrier has already paid. Criminal restititution can include the same medical bills that were presented to the carrier, loss of earnings, future medical bills, etc. The court will not consider the settlement the poster previously received from the carrier. The court looks at the victim as having not received any money for their injuries.
The defendant's insurance carrier was dumb to settle the case prior to the criminal restitution hearing.
Hey Stephen....TAG!!!! You're it.
[QUOTE=BelizeBreeze]Hey Stephen....TAG!!!! You're it.[/QUOTE]Is this tag team or cage match? Which ever, lynx is chum ;)
Quote: "Poster can no longer file a civil action against the defendant for injuries/damages from the accident."
Thank you. This is what I've been saying all along. BB just likes to argue I think.