Posts Tagged ‘litigation’
Monday, June 28th, 2010
If you have been involved in a California personal injury accident that was not your fault, you probably have a number of questions about how the legal process works once you have filed a lawsuit against the negligent driver. A personal injury lawsuit begins with the filing of a complaint against the negligent party or parties. Each side then tries to determine what happened in the accident and what evidence is available to support or contradict the claim of negligence. One way that lawyers try to determine what evidence will be presented in a court trial is to take depositions.
A deposition is the sworn testimony of a witness taken before trial. The testimony is generally taken at one of the lawyer’s offices. There is no judge present during a deposition but each witness is placed under oath and must swear to tell the truth. Lawyers for both sides may then ask questions. The questions and answers are recorded and later transcribed by a court reporter.
In most cases, anything that you testify to in a deposition may be introduced at a later trial. Additionally, if the witness is unavailable when it is time for the trial, the answers given during the deposition may be entered into the record as if the witness were present. The deposition process is very formal as a rule. You will sit with your attorney and a representative from the opposing party will be there with their attorney. Once you are sworn in, the attorney for the opposing party (in this case the other driver) will begin asking you questions. Taking part in a deposition can be an intimidating process but the better prepared you are the more relaxed and comfortable you will feel. California personal injury attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates offers the following tips to help make the deposition process easier for witnesses:
1. Spend time preparing with your lawyer before the deposition. The legal process in general can be scary if you are new to it. A deposition can be very formal and may make you feel somewhat uncomfortable if you are not prepared well. Spend as much time as you need with your lawyer ahead of time practicing what the deposition will be like. By doing this, you will know better what to expect and be more comfortable answering the questions.
2. Listen carefully to the question. Always listen to what the lawyer is asking you. If your lawyer objects to the question being asked then wait until the lawyers have finished debating the objection and your lawyer gives you the go ahead to answer it.
3. Answer only the question being asked. Try to focus on exactly what the lawyer is asking you. Do not add any additional information. Be truthful in your answer but do not offer additional information. If you feel that an explanation for your answer is needed, speak to your lawyer and they can decide whether to bring that information out when it is his turn to ask questions.
4. Stay calm. Sometimes, the lawyer for the opposing party may ask questions that you feel are offensive or that anger you. Try to remain calm and simply answer the question unless your lawyer tells you that you do not need to. If you feel that the question creates a misunderstanding or leads to an incorrect conclusion then tell your lawyer and let him straighten it out when it is his turn to question you.
If you have any additional questions about the deposition process or accident litigation in general, please feel free to contact California personal injury lawyer Emery Ledger at Ledger & Associates 1-800-300-0001 or online at www.ledgerlaw.com.
Tags: accident, attorney, attorney emery ledger, california personal injury attorney, claim, complaint, deposition, depositions, emery, emery ledger, fault, injury, injury accident, law, lawsuit, lawyer, lawyers, Ledger, ledgerlaw.com, litigation, Negligence, negligent driver, Personal Injury, personal injury accident, personal injury attorney, personal injury law, personal injury lawsuit, personal injury lawyer, questions and answers, to tell the truth, witness
Posted in Personal Injury | No Comments »
Friday, June 18th, 2010
If you own a car, you probably have insurance as well. Unfortunately, approximately 14% of American drivers do not have any type of car insurance. The reasons may vary, from beliefs that it is unnecessary to simply not being able to afford it. Regardless of why some motorists choose not to have insurance, it is still a hassle to get involved in an accident with an uninsured motorist. In this case, uninsured motorist laws come into play when these people are involved in an accident, and the best way to make sure you receive coverage for damages to your car is to speak to a car accident attorney.
Uninsured Motorist Law (UM) varies from state to state, and insurance companies deal with it accordingly. In many cases, it is hard to make a claim against a person with no insurance, because their assets are not enough to warrant litigation. However, if you have uninsured motorist coverage, you can make a claim against your insurance to recover damages in case of serious injuries. This type of coverage generally accounts for:
- medical expenses
- loss of wages
- pain, suffering and permanent injury
- loss of the ability to keep earning in the future
If you find yourself involved in an accident with an uninsured individual, you should seek help from an experienced attorney. Uninsured motorist laws can be very complex because they deal with a specialized team on the insurer’s side trying to belittle or deny your claim. A lawyer with knowledge in the subject can provide assistance to help you get the compensation you deserve.
There is a range of car accidents that occur every day, from fender benders to full frontal collisions that end in fatalities. Furthermore, many times these auto accidents cause unintentional physical injuries that may go unnoticed – such traumatic brain injuries or back pains. Car accident attorneys strive to reach settlements for drivers in auto collisions, however, when you get into an accident with an uninsured motorists, it can create a much more complicated case. Settlements are meant to cover wreckage done to the vehicle along with medical expenses for injuries. However, when the other driver is uninsured, you can end up paying for all of your expenses out of pocket. Therefore, it is crucial to seek out an experienced, well-prepared lawyer who is able to ensure that you receive the proper compensation for damage done to you and your vehicle. Furthermore, this will enable you to focus on your healthcare and facilitate a fast and successful recovery.
If you or a loved one has been in a car accident, for any additional information or question regarding uninsured motorists or insurance coverage relevant to a case, please contact California car accident lawyer Emery Ledger of Law Offices of Ledger & Associates at 1-800-300-0001 or visit his website www.LedgerLaw.com.
Tags: auto accidents, auto collisions, car accident attorney, car accident attorneys, car accidents, car insurance, damages, fender benders, hassle, insurance companies, insurer, litigation, medical expenses, physical injuries, traumatic brain injuries, uninsured motorist coverage, uninsured motorist laws, uninsured motorists, wages
Posted in Auto Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
Wednesday, May 5th, 2010
When you are involved in a vehicle collision, you may not know who is at fault. Sometimes the police or insurance company will rule who is at fault based upon witness statements and the accident scene, but there is no such thing as an error-free investigation, so if you want to protect yourself, you should conduct your own investigation and document the car accident yourself very carefully, so that later you have the proof you need to show that you were not at fault and can give evidence to this fact to settle with insurance companies or to pursue litigation.
Generally, the driver who is at fault is the one that broke the traffic law that resulted in the accident. For instance, if you merged into traffic without first looking, and collided with a car then you would likely be found at fault. This is especially true if you admit to the other driver or to police that you did not check the road before you merged. Therefore, it is important to admit nothing to the other driver or apologize to him or her. This will allow you to protect yourself so that if your case comes to court later, or in front of an insurance company, you won’t have made any incriminating statements.
Finding out who is at fault is generally the task of the police and the insurance companies will usually go by the findings made. However, this can be difficult. Let’s take a look at some examples where the other driver may be at fault. Two cars are traveling down an icy hill, and they both slide out of control at the same time, with the car at the rear striking the other car from behind. In a situation like this, it is likely that the car at the back would be found at fault because it was likely following the first car too closely and could not avoid an accident.
However, in this same basic situation just one minor detail different and it could be the driver in front that is responsible for the accident occurring. For example, suppose that the driver out front was the only car that spun out, causing the second car to hit him from behind. This might be found to be the first drivers fault, for driving too fast for road conditions or not being observant enough.
If both drivers were driving too fast then they could both very well be found equally at fault, which usually means that each insurance company pays for the damage to the cars they were covering. However, just because an investigation was conducted does not mean that there were no errors on the part of the police or the insurance companies that appraised the car.
This is why it is vital, if you have been involved in an accident and found to be at fault, that you seek the advice of a qualified car accident litigation attorney. At attorney will be able to reconstruct the accident, get the advice of established experts in the field, and hopefully prove that you were not at fault and that the other driver is liable for the accident.
Tags: accident scene, accidental collision attorney, accidental collision lawyer, car accident, car accident attorney, hit and run accident, litigation, vehicle collision
Posted in Auto Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
Monday, May 3rd, 2010
If you are one of the thousands of people that have been affected by the numerous Toyota recalls over the past year, you may be wondering how the latest decision made by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) will affect your case or lawsuit. First, the JPML is a panel of federal judges they are charged with looking into federal cases wherein a number of Plaintiffs have filed suit for the same or very similar reasons and determining whether judicial economy would be better served if the cases were moved to a single court for the pre-trial discovery phase. The panel also then selects the location for the centralization of the cases if the decision is made to centralize. Centralization is not the same as filing a class action lawsuit. When cases are centralized at the federal level, they are only moved to a single court for the pre-trial or discovery phase of the legal process.
In the case of the many lawsuits that have been filed against Toyota – and those that are expected to be filed – the decision was made to centralize them due to the fact that the cases will all rely on much of the same evidence and will require testimony from many of the same individuals. The idea is that by centralizing the cases attorneys for both sides do not have to duplicate efforts therefore raising the costs of the lawsuits as well as taking considerably longer to conclude the cases. Interestingly, the decision was made to include both personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits in the centralization order along with the economic loss lawsuits.
So what does this decision mean to you is you are considering filing a lawsuit against Toyota? In practical terms, it means that all the pre-trial filings and discovery will be conducted in California. Regardless of where you live or where you injuries took place, the case will be moved to California for the time being. This also means that a single judge – Judge Selna – will be responsible for making all the decision regarding pre-trial discovery issues in all the Toyota cases. Pre-trial discovery issued can be crucial decisions in any legal case. Issues regarding who can be deposed, what evidence is admissible and what experts can be used are generally determined at this stage in the process. If your case is not resolved during the discovery stage, then it will be returned back to the originally court for trial; however the decisions that were made at the pre-trial stage may have already affected the outcome of the case.
If you have been injured, either physically or financially, by a Toyota manufactured vehicle and would like to speak to California Toyota recall attorney about how the decision to centralize the cases may effect your specific situation, then please feel free to contact Emery Ledger at his law firm of Ledger & Associates. Attorney Ledger can be reached at 1-800-300-0001 or online at www.ledgerlaw.com.
Tags: attorney ledger, attorneys, cat, class action, class action lawsuit, discovery phase, filing a lawsuit, jpml, judicial panel on multidistrict litigation, lawsuits, ledgerlaw.com, litigation, Personal Injury, plaintiff, plaintiffs, recalls, testimony, toyota, toyota recall, Toyota Recall Attorney, Toyota recalls, vehicle, wrongful death, wrongful death law, wrongful death lawsuit, wrongful death lawsuits
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Wednesday, April 28th, 2010
In the wake of the recent Toyota recalls covering over 8 million vehicles and counting as well as numerous fatalities and injury accidents, litigation has been filed in various states against the giant automaker and more is expected in the near future. In cases like these, where the Defendant is a corporation, the Plaintiff often has a choice as to whether they want to file the case in State or Federal court. In order to file a lawsuit such as this in federal court, the case must either address a violation of federal law OR be considered a diversity case. A diversity case is one in which the parties are located in different states AND the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The requirement that the parties be located in different states can get complicated in the case of a corporation, but where the corporation is registered, where their main office is located and where they have done business can all be considered when deciding where they are located for purposes of the diversity test. Not surprisingly, a number of lawsuits have been filed against Toyota in federal court and more are anticipated. With the number of lawsuits expected to climb, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has stepped in and ordered that the cases be centralized in California. Why was this done? Who is the JPML and what effect will this decision have on the litigation?
First, the JPML was created by an act of Congress back in 1968 and has two main functions. First, the Panel looks at cases filed in U.S. Federal Courts to determine if they involve a common question of fact that would serve judicial economy by bringing all the cases into one court. Second, the Panel decides where the cases will be heard if they are centralized and who the Judge will be that hears them. This is NOT the same as joining the cases for the purposes of a class action. Under a centralization order from the JPML, the cases are only brought under the jurisdiction of a single court through the pre-trial discovery stage of the proceedings. If a case is not terminated at the end of the pre-trial discovery stage, then it is remanded back to its original court of jurisdiction. The idea behind the centralization order is to prevent duplication of discovery efforts and allow the parties to work together to conserve resources for the parties as well as the judiciary.
In the Toyota cases, the JMPL has ordered that the cases be centralized in California, due in large part to the fact that the majority of the cases filed to date have been filed in California. Additionally, Toyota’s U.S. Division’s headquarters are in Torrence, California which is where the JMPL has ordered that the pre-trial process take place. U.S District Judge James V. Selna has been appointed as the Judge that will oversee the pre-trial phase of the lawsuits.
While Judge Selna will not hear cases that ultimately go to trial (unless they were originally filed in his court), the decision to centralize these cases can have a huge effect on the outcomes for the Plaintiffs. As the Judge that oversees the pre-trial discovery process, Judge Selna will make important decisions about admissibility of evidence, testimony of witnesses and many other crucial issues. If the cases are not settled or dismissed by the time that discovery process is done, then they will be returned to their original court and another Judge will have chance to impact the outcome. For now, however, the future of many Toyota recall lawsuits rests in the hands of Judge Selna.
If you have additional questions, or have been personally injured by one of the Toyota recalled vehicles, please feel free to contact California Toyota recall attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates at 1-800-300-0001 or visit him online at www.ledgerlaw.com
Tags: jurisdiction, law, lawsuit, lawsuits, litigation, million vehicles, plaintiff, plaintiffs, recalls, recent news, states, toyota, Toyota Accident Attorney, Toyota lawsuit, toyota recall, Toyota Recall Attorney, Toyota recalls, witness, witnesses
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Wednesday, April 28th, 2010
Toyota, the automaker giant, was back in the news this past week when they agreed not to appeal the $16.4 million fine levied by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The fine, the largest on record against an automaker, was the maximum fine allowed under current federal law. Toyota could have protested the fine and chosen to battle it out with the Department of Justice, but announced earlier this week that did not intent to appeal and instead would be paying the fine within 30 days.
While $16.4 million sounds like an extremely large amount of money, let’s put it in perspective. For a company whose annual revenue is in the billions of dollars, 16 million dollars doesn’t sound quite as remarkable. In reality, fighting the fines may have cost the automaker more than paying the fine in the long run. Aside from the actual costs of the litigation, avoiding any further damage to Toyota’s reputation may have been a motivation to accept the fine as quietly as possible. The once seemingly untouchable automaker has suffered potentially irreparable harm to its reputation over the last year. With the first recall last Fall of over 4 million vehicles after the fatal accident in a Toyota manufactured SUV in San Diego, the questions about when Toyota knew about the defects in its vehicles began to emerge. With the second and third recalls in January and February of this year, the questions took on more importance ultimately spurning an investigation by federal officials in the United States. It was that investigation that led to the fine levied against Toyota last week.
With over 8 million vehicles and counting on the Toyota recall list, Toyota’s reputation has certainly taken a hit. Accepting the fine and agreeing to pay it within a timely manner was one way to keep yet another controversy from erupting. Additionally, Toyota was able to accept the fine without agreeing to any wrongdoing, says California Toyota recall attorney Emery Ledger. The fine was ordered by the Department of Transportation – not a judge. The Department of Transportation has the authority to investigate possible wrongdoing by a manufacturer and clearly they can order a fine if they find that there was wrongdoing. Payment of the fine, however, does not equal an admission of guilt by the manufacturer. In fact, Toyota has specifically said they do not delay in reporting the defects in their vehicles and they have explicitly denied any wrongdoing in the matter. Their explanation for agreeing to pay the fine is essentially to avoid a prolonged battle with the Department of Justice. While this explanation makes sense for a number of reasons, it remains to be seen how the car buying public perceives the agreement to pay the fine.
If you have been personally affected by the Toyota recall or have been the victim of an accident involving one of the recalled vehicles, you may be entitled to compensation for any injuries or damages you received as a result. For more information on the Toyota recalls and your legal options if you have been a victim of one of the recalled vehicles, please contact California Toyota recall attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates at 1-800-300-0001 or contact him through his website at www.ledgerlaw.com.
Tags: accident, compensation, damages, emery ledger, juries, law, Ledger, ledgerlaw.com, legal options, litigation, toyota, toyota recall, Toyota Recall Attorney, Toyota recalls
Posted in Toyota Recall Attorney | No Comments »
Friday, April 16th, 2010
Almost all states requirement drivers to show proof of financial responsibility in order to legally drive on their roadways. California is no exception to that rule. California Insurance Code §11580.1b sets out the minimum liability insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles as follows: $15,000 for injury/death to one person; $30,000 for injury/death to more than one person; and $5,000 for damage to property. Despite these legal requirements, many people drive without liability insurance. It may be that their insurance has lapsed due to an oversight or possibly because they simply couldn’t afford to pay for it. Regardless of the reason, San Diego car accident attorney Emery Ledger is frequently asked what happens if someone is injured in an accident that was not their fault but they did not have the legally required liability insurance.
The California legislature and courts debated that issue for years before reaching a conclusion back in 1996. Proposition 213 finally decided the issue in somewhat of a compromise between the two sides. Proposition 213 essentially says that if you are the victim in a car accident wherein you were not at fault, but were driving without the legally required liability coverage, then you are still entitled to recover economic damages from the car accident, according to San Diego car accident attorney Emery Ledger of Ledger & Associates. You may not, however, recover non-economic damages. Non-economic damages are what most people think of as pain and suffering. What this means, in most cases, is that you can recover the cost of your medical care, property damage to your vehicle, lost time from work and other out of pocket expenses. You will not be able to get additional money for any emotional toll that the accident took on you. There are additional provisions under Proposition for special circumstances such as when one of the drivers was driving under the influence or when one of the drivers was in the commission of a felony but the above applies to the majority of uninsured situations.
While there may be other penalties that impact your driver’s license, the bottom line is that if you were injured in a car accident and you were not at fault then you may still be able to recover compensation for the injuries you have suffered. As you may know, those damages alone can add up rather quickly and you should not have to shoulder the financial burden of paying for them if you were not at fault in the car accident. If you have been in a car accident, then don’t be afraid to contact an experienced San Diego car accident attorney to discuss your specific case. Emery Ledger, of Ledger & Associates has been practicing personal injury litigation for over twelve years in the San Diego area and would be happy to offer you a free detailed evaluation of your car accident case. He can be reached at his office at 1-800-300-0001 or you can visit him online at www.ledgerlaw.com.
Tags: accident, accident attorney, accident case, attorney, car accident, car accident attorney, compensation, damages, driving under the influence, economic damages, ego, emery, emery ledger, fault, injury, insurance, liability, Liability insurance, litigation, money, offer, pain and suffering, Personal Injury, roadways, states, suffering, vehicle
Posted in Auto Accident Lawyer | No Comments »
