Sorry, but we seem to have hijacked this thread a bit….
When I “won” my lawyer got 35% of the take. That was his “fee”. I was out of pocket nothing for legal fees.
My injuries have pretty much healed. Despite being broadsided by a pickup truck going probably 35-45mph, all I had was a torn ACL. If I had been a foot slower, I would have had a crushed leg, two feet slower, and I probably would have been simply run over. So, despite two surgeries to repair my ACL and remove scar tissue, I’m pretty good shape. I was a runner, and had run a marathon. Every since the accident I’ve been a much slower runner and can’t run over about 8miles without my knee aching. But, trust me I don’t moan about that, I always count my lucky starts that I have a knee to ache. (Oh and the fact I was wearing a full face helmet and a leather jacket with armor in it definitely helped)
After my knee regained it flexibility, yes I got another motorcycle – a Ducati Super Light. But as the freeways grew more congested, I sold it and never bought another. Now I’m married, and I don’t think my wife would tolerate me having another rocket.
bsrsharma – In a injury accident, the jury is not allowed to know anything about any party having insurance. The thinking is, that if a juror knows there is insurance, they will be more likely to give a judgement that awards the insurance’s money, whereas if they know the person doesn’t have insurance, they would be awarding the defendant’s money and less likely to make a big award. The juror is supposed to be making an award based on what the damages are worth, not what/who can pay.
All the attorneys, and the judge are clear to you before you go into the court room to testify, that you are not to mention anything about insurance, and the lawyers don’t ask any questions that will give you the opportunity to say anything about insurance. This isn’t a conspiracy in the evil sense, it’s all very out in the open. And there’s no perjury, because you are never asked about insurance, so you never say anything about it. So, no lie told, only omission.
In my case, all the medical bills had to have “co-payments” whited out since they aren’t allowed to be shown. So, your medical bills that you claim are reduced by your co-payments, and you don’t get to sue for them. But it gets covered because the jury typically awards more than the actual medical bills. (And in my case they awarded three times medical bills. In the end, my health insurance got reimbursed a third, the attorney got a third and I got a third for putting up with this charade.)
The part that rubs me, and that I find so hypocritical is that we select these people to be on the juror because we trust them. Then we make speeches about how “everything” is going to be brought to the court and the truth will prevail. Except, “everything” excludes a variety of things. (Based on the arguments of the lawyers to the judge about x and y not being relevant, and thus inadmissible) Well, if we trust these people to decide on the verdict, why don’t we trust them that if we tell them everything they will in the end decide on something fair. I guess, because in truth we don’t trust the jurors. After all, they are 12 people who couldn’t think of an excuse to get out of jury duty!
