Verdicts

Illinois Legislature Sends Bill to Governor’s Desk to Help Injury Victims Get Justice Sooner / End Delays

January 29, 2021 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Insurance companies seem to have a reputation. You may have heard the phrase, “delay, delay, delay, don’t pay.” Well, legislators in Springfield are trying to change that. We’ve all experienced interruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Court houses have shut down as well and only relatively recently have cases been back on the court call for mostly remote video link proceedings. This reality has put a lot of injury victims in an unfair holding pattern when it comes to legitimate, meritorious claims. With some Illinois county courts already being among a few of the busiest in the nation, this has made an already frustrating process for plaintiffs an even more difficult one.

People who have been injured because of no fault of their own may not be able to work or earn a living in addition to other financial hardships they may have experienced because of their loss. All this, and we haven’t even begun to discuss their injuries and medical appointments. Corporations and insurance companies don’t often have to deal with similar monetary burdens when a claim arises against them. With few exceptions, they keep operating and generating revenue. The current system seems allows them the benefit of delaying payment on legitimate claims.

In an effort to remedy this situation the Illinois House and Senate passed a bill early in January of 2021, that if Governor Pritzker signs, would add 9% per year prejudgment interest to wrongful death and personal injury verdicts. Currently, the law allows post-judgment interest after a verdict. According to court statistics, the overwhelming majority of cases settle before trial. This bill would only apply to approximately 3% of cases that result in a judge or jury determining if the hurt party bringing the lawsuit had a valid or meritorious case.

Some may argue that this law is unfair to companies that have a right to dispute the value of claims and the government shouldn’t try to speed up payments by making them settle more quickly or face a penalty. However, Illinois is quite late to the game when it comes to this type of law. 46 of 50 states already have some form of a prejudgment interest law on their books. In reality, the law helps to reduce unreasonable delays for legitimate claims. If a case goes to trial and the person who brought the lawsuit loses, of course, no interest will be assessed. An injury or wrongful death claim will still need to be proven in court for this change to apply. Additionally, the passage of this bill won’t make companies pay the full amount of interest if the claim that started before the law takes effect. Instead, yearly interest will start to accrue after the bill becomes law for those cases.

In reality, when it comes to legitimate claims, insurance companies and corporations don’t stand to lose much of anything at all by having to pay interest on cases where they delay settlement. Whereas injury victims with meritorious claims will likely be treated more fairly by having their cases resolves sooner. Moreover, the public will benefit from a court system that is less bogged down by such a large case load. This change could benefit everyone.

Trucking Industry Continues Fight Against Nuclear Verdicts

December 10, 2020 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Members of the trucking industry are continuing to battle against the rising numbers of nuclear verdicts that have been made against motor carriers–a fight that is far from over, experts say.

Chris Spear, President of American Trucking Associations recently stated that the industry itself was working more diligently than ever to fight these verdicts taking place in trucking accident litigation.

“We’re growing very tired as an industry being picked on by the plaintiff’s bar,” said Spear last year during an ATA conference. “We’re growing very tired of padding the pockets of trial lawyers at the expense of trucking jobs, and we’re just not going to stand for it anymore. It’s an all-out assault against the industry, and we need to be in a position to fight back.”

The Omnibus Tort Reform bill in Louisiana brought an end to the law banning trucking attorneys from presenting any evidence of victims of trucking-related accidents not wearing seat belts. The bill also limits inclusion of some medical bills from jury awards.

“The war rages on, but I think we are winning some battles, particularly at the state level,” said Spear. “A key part of our strategy is to expose this profession and the adverse impact it is having on our industry, on the hardworking men and women in trucking, but also directly on the economy itself.”

An 80-page study by the American Transportation Research Institute about increases in nuclear verdicts was released earlier this year, detailing the logic among juries deciding these particular verdicts against the trucking industry. ATRI concluded, after researching 600 different big rig-involved crashes with verdicts of $10 million or more, that these nuclear verdicts have risen exponentially over the last 10 years.

According to the study, between 2010 and 2018, an average verdict in a trucking-related trial jumped from $2.3 million to $22.2 million.

“When I started practicing 26 years ago, it was a very different landscape than now,” said Mike Langford, a litigator at Scopelitis, Garving, Light, Hanson & Feary. “There are better plaintiff attorneys handling trucking cases now than were handling the cases 25 years ago, or even 15 years ago.”

The reason attorneys have boosted their abilities, though, is because trucking incidents have increased steeply, as have the amount of injuries and deaths which occur as a result.

Founder of the Academy of Truck Accident Attorneys, Michael Leizerman, noted an incident involving a 27-year-old victim who became quadriplegic following a trucking-related accident. The client required $20 million to cover his medical costs, which would be necessary throughout the course of his life.

“The dispute may be, is it $17 million or $22 million?” said Leizerman. “In that case, even the trucking attorneys are saying, ‘Yeah, let’s take care of this guy.’”

ATA also has often handpicked specific cases to cite in order to bring attention to particular instances in which victims of truck crashes receive large rewards–an effort to incite pushback against these lawsuits.

In a recent interview, Spear referenced a particular 2014 case involving a tractor-trailer and a pickup truck, in which the latter had crossed a Texas interstate median and collided with the trailer. A child in the pickup truck died upon impact, another was paralyzed and two others were injured. In court, the family of these passengers argued that the tractor-trailer driver was behaving recklessly in severe weather and that he should have pulled over. The jury ruled in their favor, and awarded the family $90 million.

Although court documents from this case showed that the trucking company, Werner Enterprises, had stayed quiet regarding its disregard for having any clear safety policies, Spear made it known he believed the driver was not at fault.

Werner is still working to appeal the verdict.

If tort reform continues being regarded as a high-priority issue, recovery amounts given to victims and victims’ families of low levels of trucking safety would fall. ATA has made it clear that it views saving money in these verdicts as being much more important than the safety of those on the road and the financial help that can be given to those who have become hurt as a result of low safety standards.

ATRI Says Number of Nuclear Verdicts Against Trucking Industry is Increasing

September 3, 2020 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Almost 300 court cases with jury verdicts of at least $1 million over the last five years have been made against trucking fleets.

In a new report made by the American Transportation Research Institute, named “Understanding the Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on the Trucking Industry,” the institution details the comprehensive research done regarding “nuclear verdicts” that took place between the years of 2006 and 2019.

In the 600 cases analyzed, it was found that big verdicts against motor carriers had been growing exponentially. Only four of these 600 were over $1 million in 2006, but had grown to over 70 cases of at least $1 million verdicts in 2014. ATRI’s consideration of nuclear verdicts, which are of $10 million or more, made up 71 total cases out of the 600.

“This issue has had a stifling impact on motor carriers and industry stakeholders–well beyond those involved in a truck crash,” said Moseley Marcinak Law Group partner, Rob Moseley. “ATRI’s research on litigation provides important guidance on leveling the playing field between truckers and trial lawyers, both in and outside of the courtroom.”

After creating a comprehensive analysis from dozens of insurance expert, motor carrier professional, defense attorney, and plaintiff attorney interviews, ATRI made recommendations for pretrial preparation modifications, explanations for changes in the litigation landscape, new mediation approaches, and analysis about how large verdicts affect overall safety.

In conclusion, ATRI found that the two main factors impacting verdict sizes wre crashes and litigation.

For crash factors, the institute focused on injuries sustained, the number of deaths, and the number of cars involved. For litigation, ATRI focused on expert witness presence.

“Five particular factors brought against a defendant yielded 100% verdicts in factor of the plaintiff,” the study said. “These issues included hours-of-service or log book violations, lack of a clean driving history, driving under the influence of controlled substances, fleeing the scene of the crash, and health-related issues.”

The severity of the injury, the number of people involved, the characteristics of people involved. and the makes and models of vehicles involved also had large effects on verdicts, ATRI said. Verdict sizes increased by over 1,600% percent when children were involved in crashes, regardless of who was at fault.

The study also found that the time between the date of the crash and the date of the verdict, traumatic brain injuries sustained during the crash, and the number of children injured or killed in a crash all significantly increase verdict sizes. On the other hand, the presence of a defense expert witness was found to decrease verdict sizes.

Injuries to spinal cords tended to at least double verdict sizes, increasing jury awards to just under $3.5 million. For rear-end crashes, plaintiffs win the verdict in almost 90% of cases. If a rear-end crash takes place in a work zone, that crash will bring in the highest verdict of any rear-end accident, averaging around $7.25 million per case. If a crash has a “spin and roll” incident, that case will likely bring in an award of almost $15 million.

“This study documents a frequency in excessive awards that, while not surprising, tells us that the trial system has gotten completely off track,” said Porter Rennie Woodard Kendall partner, Clay Porter. “Foundational changes are needed in the way we determine non-economic and punitive damages.”

In addition, insurance rates are clearly based on safety backgrounds, although fleets are now paying more than ever.

In ATRI’s study, a respondent stated that ‘low-risk’ carriers have seen up to 10% increases in insurance premiums, “while new ventures and average-to-marginal carriers are experiencing a 35% to 40% annual increase,” which has been continuing to rise for the last three years. “Based on ATRI’s operational cost data, small fleets and owner-operators pay out-of-pocket considerably more on a per-unit basis than larger fleets.”

Last month, we reported that in ATRI’s annual Top Industry Survey, a top research priority for 2020 is the impact of small settlements on the trucking industry. A study into this topic would look into legal settlements under $1 million and focus on each incident’s fleet response, as well as the frequency of those cases. It would also consider verdicts in comparison to settlements, which will aim to follow up on ATRI’s nuclear verdicts analyses.

American Trucking Association Targets “Nuclear” Verdicts

October 21, 2019 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

American Trucking Associations President Chris Spear is planning to lead the organization in fighting large court verdicts against the trucking industry. He claims the association is always quick to compensate those involved in cases in which the ATA is at fault, but that most cases are not being settled fairly.

“We’re growing very tired as an industry of being picked on by the plaintiff’s bar,” Spear said. “I think we’re growing very tired of padding the pockets of trial lawyers at the expense of trucking jobs, and we’re just not going to stand for it anymore.” Spear claims these verdicts are an “all-out assault” against the trucking industry, and therefore, ATA should be positioning itself to fight back.

Spear told Transport Topics Radio that he believes the number of lawsuits against the trucking industry is increasing as attorneys who specialize in these kinds of lawsuits are amping up their advertising. These are what he calls “nuclear” lawsuits.

He claims these “massive” suits come against the trucking industry regarding incidents that “are clearly not [its] fault,” and that trial lawyers in these particular suits are working a false narrative that the industry is “devastating the fabric of families involved in these accidents,” which he claims are usually not at the hands of truckers.

However, as any individual who has learned of any trucking-involved accident knows, this is clearly not the case.

We recently wrote about a historic “underride accident” case that comes after a slew of these accident reports over the past few years. Underride accidents take place when a car slides underneath a tractor trailer, and is one of the deadliest types of accidents on U.S. roadways.

The particular case referenced occurred when a family was awarded $42 million in a lawsuit against trucking company Barkandhi Express and Utility, when 16-year-old Riley Hein’s car became trapped under the side of a trailer made by Utility Manufacturing Company, causing the truck to drag Riley’s car for a half mile until it caught on fire, killing Riley immediately.

Trailers are not currently required to have side guards, even though the trucking industry has admitted in trial that over 200 people a year die in underride accidents.

The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association says adding the weight of new guards to trailers would require companies to add more tractor trailers onto the roads, which it says would be more of an inconvenience than a safety benefit.

What is worse–documents revealed in Riley’s case show the TTMA asking major trailer manufacturers to provide detailed information regarding side guard costs so that the association could be able to potentially develop defense strategies against future underride lawsuits.

Still, Chris Spear and the American Trucking Associations have been handpicking cases to highlight only what they hope will gain public traction in opposition of lawsuits against the trucking industry.

Spear brought up a particular case in his Transport Topics interview, which occurred in 2014 and involved a pickup truck crossing a median and colliding with a tractor-trailer on a Texas interstate. The family of the pickup driver argued in court that the trucker should have pulled over due to inclement weather conditions, and the jury awarded them close to $90 million. The carrier, Werner Enterprises, is still working to appeal this decision.

“We’re paying substantial money to make [verdicts like these] right, and this [legal] profession needs to be called out,” says Spear.

However, Spear isn’t giving all of the facts of the case. According to court documents, evidence shows Werner had been staying quiet in regards to its disregard for safety policies around new student drivers. Each year, Werner hires 4,000 new drivers without previous truck driving experience. The driver in this case was a student driver, who exceeded 60 mph in icy conditions. The National Weather Service had been reporting freezing rain and icy roads 12 hours before the collision, yet Werner never communicated this warning to its driver.

“Werner’s lack of basic safety systems and its inadequate training processes for students drivers–combined with the business model of assigning student drivers on expedited deliveries–is creating a highly dangerous and unsustainable dynamic on U.S. Highways,” said the family’s co-lead counsel, Eric Penn of the Penn Law Firm.

What Spear also fails to mention is that the jury had heard the extent of the evidence and made what they believed to be a fair verdict. Of course, juries can make an incorrect judgment, but even when they do make a verdict against the trucking industry, tort reform comes into play.

Tort reform limits the recoveries awarded to those harmed by trucking industry dangers. This turns out to be nonsensical, as no two cases are the same and should always be judged on their own merits, not by limits on recovery.

The American Trucking Associations feels differently. Spear says verdicts like the one in the pickup truck case have made him decide to pledge to actively work with government leaders on tort reform efforts, even though he knows the overall view on the topic may not be in his favor.

“On the federal level, the votes may not be there for federal tort reform. In fact, I know that.”

If these limits weren’t enough, we have the trucking industry going to extreme lengths to avoid admitting fault in accidents. Not only is Utility Trailer Manufacturing Company working to appeal the $19 million it had to pay for its part in the verdict of Riley’s case, but it offered the Hein family a $14 million settlement if they kept all internal documents quiet.

In another case against Werner, court documents showed the trucking company staying quiet about its disregard for safety policies in regards to new student drivers–Werner hires 4,000 new drivers a year without any previous truck driving experience.

What Spear also doesn’t mention is the fact that trucking companies and their insurers hire as expensive and prestigious law firms for their cases as possible–so, not only are jurors always making decisions based on information from both sides, but these law firms are powerful and know how to swing a case in their favor–whether or not their techniques are ethical.

If verdicts like the ones Spear mentions are so unfair, what does that say about the trucking industry’s position and their lawyers’ abilities to make a compelling argument?

Levinson’s $43M Day Care Child Abuse Verdict Sends Loud Message – Protect Children & Ensure Safety

December 18, 2014 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

On Monday, Ken Levinson secured a $43,000,000.00 verdict in a day care child abuse case against a day care employee who sexually abused a six year old girl at the day care. Levinson won the verdict in St. Clair county, Illinois, which is near St. Louis, Missouri. A verdict of this size should shed light on day care child abuse while making a loud statement: if day care owners and operators are not going to protect and ensure the safety of the children in their care, they will be held fully accountable for the harms they cause or allow to be caused to children.

Our hope is that the verdict will help make sure daycare owners/operators do complete background checks on anyone who may have contact with children and will properly monitor their employees to protect every child trusted with their care. Let’s make sure that this type of betrayal of trust stops.

In a 2012 report detailing child maltreatment, the Children’s Bureau (Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Administration for Children and Families) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, noted that four-fifths (78.3%) of child abuse victims were neglected, 18.3 percent were physically abused, 9.3 percent were sexually abused and 8.5 percent were psychologically maltreated. Of the victims who were sexually abused, 26.3 percent were in the age group of 12–14 years and one-third (33.8%) were younger than 9 years.

The historic verdict, although uncollectible, represents vindication for victim and the victim’s family. But who knows – as one juror pointed out during the trial, an incarcerated defendant could win the lottery.

While this was a tragic, troubling, and traumatizing event, hopefully it provides hope for other day care child abuse victims, and sends a strong message to day care centers across the nation.