Jurewitz Law Group

Live help by Velaro

Practice Areas

Auto, Motorcycle and Truck Accidents

Progressive Insurance--"We'll Pay Your Client's Medical Bills but That is All..."
Dec 27, 2009
Insurance companies and tort reform advocates often argue that plaintiff injury accident lawyers and their injured clients are running up the cost of car insurance and generally making it more expensive for all Americans to live. Not true. This is a story of a recent interaction we had with Progressive Insurance which demonstrates that insurance companies and their unreasonable positions are largely to blame for the increasing cost of auto insurance.

We recently submitted a demand package on behalf of a client who was injured after being rear-ended at a stop sign. Simple case with no liability dispute and limited and reasonable medical treatment for a few weeks to care for our client's sore back and neck.

Our client's medical treatment totalled approximately $6,000. Progressive Insurance's offer was $6,500 on a take it or leave it basis. They would offer no more money.

Fine. Although Progressive and other insurance companies think they are the final decision makers as to the value of personal injury cases in California, they are not. Juries here in San Diego and elsewhere throughout the State are the ones who ultimately must decide what a case is worth and how much compensation the injured victim will receive. In these cases, we immediately file a lawsuit and serve the defendant with a copy of the complaint, summons, and a letter which nicely explains that we are sorry to involve them, but their insurance company refused to deal with our office fairly. Now the defendant will spend time at deposition and ultimately at trial while Progressive Insurance will spend more defending the lawsuit than it would take to settle the claim--and then they will still have to pay the jury's verdict.

And somehow plaintiff's lawyers and their clients are blamed for increasing auto insurance rates. Go figure. - 1 - 10

Child Injuries

Graco Recalls Baby Strollers | San Diego CA Child Injury Lawyer Attorn
Jan 23, 2010
Graco has announced the recall of certain Passage, Alano, and Spree strollers and travel systems after several children had suffered hurt fingers in the canopy hinge. The injuries resulted in the amputation of five fingertips and two lacerations according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

Families were warned not to use the stroller until they received a free protective cover kit for the canopy from the company.

The Graco strollers were sold at a number of stores including Burlington Coat Factory, Walmart, Target, Sears, and Kmart between October 2004 and December 2009. Not all Graco strollers were recalled because they did not include the defective hinge. Please check this notice from the CPSC to make sure that your model number is on the recall list before acting.

In order to order a stroller hinge repair kit by calling Graco's consumer service line at 800-345-4109 or order online . - 2 - 10
Recall of Dorel Asia Cribs | San Diego CA Children Injury Attorney Law
Jan 23, 2010
In the second majory recall of baby cribs in three months, Dorel Asia Cribs issued a recall of over 600,000 cribs due to threat of strangulation and suffocation. The cribs feature enough space for a child's head to become stuck and cause the airway to be cutoff, leading to death or serious brain injury.

Dorel cribs have been available in the United States since 2005.

Reportedly, at least one baby has died and at least six other babies have been injured by the Dorel cribs.

In November, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced a recall of Stork Craft cribs which affected over one million drop side cribs in the United States for the same reasons.

To obtain more information about the Dorel Asia Crib recall, call their customer service representatives at 866-762-2304. - 3 - 10

Office Announcements

Follow the Jurewitz Law Group on Twitter
May 17, 2009
Do you want to know what our San Diego personal injury attorneys are up to? Want to know of important news regarding San Diego? Want to know about important developments in the law, particularly concerning accident victims and the public?

You can now follow the Jurewitz Law Group on the social networking "micro-blog" site, Twitter.com.

Just create a Twitter account and go to http://www.twitter.com/sandiegoinjury to follow along. - 4 - 10
Jurewitz Law Group Opens Carlsbad, CA Office for North San Diego County Clients
May 17, 2009
The Jurewitz Law Group has opened a North San Diego County office in Carlsbad to serve clients seriously injured by slip and fall accidents, dog bites, and bicycle accidents. The office is easily reachable from San Marcos, Encinitas, Oceanside, Vista, and Escondido.

You can find our Carlsbad office (by appointment only) at:

2768 Loker Avenue West, Suite 101
Carlsbad, CA 92010 - 5 - 10
Jurewitz Law Group Opens New Downtown San Diego Office
May 17, 2009
The San Diego personal injury law firm, the Jurewitz Law Group, representing seriously injured people throughout California, recently moved and opened its' new San Diego office location.

Our new Downtown San Diego office is located at:

501 West Broadway, Suite 1780
San Diego, CA 92101
Tel: (619) 233-5020
Toll Free: (888) 233-5020
Fax: (888) 233-3180

New and existing clients can meet with our San Diego injury accident lawyers at our Downtown office, our North San Diego County Office in Carlsbad, or at any location throughout San Diego County.

Face to face meetings outside Southern California are also possible, but require more lead time. - 6 - 10

Jury Verdicts

Rancho Cucamonga Jury Awards Woman $23.4 Million for SUV Accident
Feb 20, 2010
A San Bernardino County jury awarded a one-man $23.4 million for catastrophic injuries she suffered after a 2007 car accident. The civil judgment was entered against Ford Motor Company and arose after the plaintiff, Cynthia Castillo, lost control of her 1997 Ford Explorer because the tread on her left rear tire separated as she drove along the freeway.

According to the evidence presented at trial, Ms. Castillo's Explorer swerved off the freeway and rolled three times down an embankment you for coming to rest. This serious rollover accidents led to her legs and most of her body being paralyzed. The evidence showed a trial that the Explorer's design cause it to lose control when Ms. Castillo's tire tread separated.

At the time of the accident, Ms. Castillo was 38. She has been a quadriplegic ever since. She has been confined to bed and has difficulty caring for a young daughter.

According to Ford Motor Company and its' attorneys, the accident was caused by a worn-out tire that Ms. Castillo put on her own vehicle and had failed to replace. Ford also blamed Ms. Castillo or failure to maintain the vehicle, arguing that her failure to replace the shocks and other maintenance failures demonstrated her own lack of care and cost are accidents and injuries.

Nonetheless, the Rancho Cucamonga, CA jury came back with a unanimous verdict in Ms. Castillo's favor, finding Ford Motor Company almost 100% at fault for causing her injuries.

This is a fantastic verdict and result for a severely injured person who now has to face life largely paralyzed and need the help of others for assistance with even the most basic tasks and routines. We are very happy for Ms. Castillo and hope that the jury's verdict will finally bring her some peace and much-needed help. - 7 - 10
Orange County Jury Awards Injured Worker $4.7 Million After Being Hit by Commercial Truck
Nov 28, 2009
On July 28, 2009, an Orange County jury awarded a severely injured construction supervisor $4.7 million after he was struck by a commercial truck while supervising the installation of a natural gas pipeline in Orange County. The 36 year old man was left with severe injuries that made him disabled and restricted his physical abilities.

The underlying commercial truck accident occurred on December 8, 2006, while the plaintiff was supervising the installation of a natural gas pipeline when he was struck by a Chevrolet Tahoe driven by an employee of the defendant making a lunch delivery. The defendant was a franchisee of three El Pollo Loco restaurants. The defendant driver had pulled from a stop sign into the intersection in front of an approaching Toyota 4-Runner. Neither driver saw the other before the collision. After both vehicles struck each other, the Chevy was propelled into the plaintiff, causing severe injury, including a shear fracture of the pelvis and a massive injury to the left shoulder. Total medical care costs exceeded $405,000 and the plaintiff lost $63,000 in income. He underwent three surgeries to stabilize his pelvis and beat two separate bouts of MERSA following the surgeries.

As a result of the accident, the plaintiff was forced to give up his field supervisor position in favor of a sedentary job as an estimator for underground construction. There was no claim for future medical care since the experts on both sides agreed that no medical treatment would improve the plaintiff's condition. The medical evidence was also largely undisputed. The plaintiff was relegated to a largely sedentary lifestyle following the auto accident. He could not lift over 20 pounds, had difficulty walking over half a mile, and could not sit or stand for prolonged periods. Prior to the car accident, plaintiff was in excellent health and had a very active lifestyle with his wife and two children.

The defendant driver pointed the finger at the driver of the 4-Runner and did not take responsibility for his own role in the accident.

After a jury trial, the jury rejected the argument that the driver of the 4-Runner was negligent and concluded that it was not reasonable for him to anticipate that the driver of the Chevy would enter the intersection when it was unsafe. The jury awarded over $405,000 for past medical costs, past wage loss of over $63,000, past "pain and suffering" of $2,000,000, and future "pain and suffering" of $2,250,000 for the remaining 40 years of plaintiff's life.

Congratulations to the plaintiff on receiving a fantastic and well-deserved victory. We wish him and his family the best in the future.

- 8 - 10

General

Insurance Companies Try to Increase Profits Through Questionable Tactics
Dec 20, 2009
A new free report from the American Association for Justice (AAJ), "Tricks of the Trade: How Insurance Companies Deny, Delay, Confuse and Refuse", tells how the insurance industry is increasingly using questionable tactics to increase their bottom lines at the expense of injured people and claimants. This only harms the public who relies on a honest and efficient insurance system to compensate them for serious accidents.

The Report identifies the following common insurance company tricks:
1. Denying Claims: This is the most common tactic and is regularly employed by all insurance companies, including Allstate, State Farm, and USAA. By denying valid claims, the insurance companies boost their profits because those are monies that will not be paid out. Insurance companies have even been known to incentivize their employees to deny valid claims.
2. Delaying until Death: Insurance companies regularly delay claims in the hope that the claimant will die before the claim is paid or hoping that the injured person will give up or settle for less. Many people do just that rather than stay the course.
3. Confusing People: You are not alone if you have ever been confused after reading your insurance contract. They even confuse lawyers. Insurance companies regularly use confusing agreements and language to discourage consumers.
4. Discriminating by Credit Score: Insurance companies determine premiums and insurance approvals based upon credit scores. Lower scores pay higher premiums.
5. Abandoning the Sick: Insurance policy holders who are the most need of medical care are often targeted by the insurance companies and have their benefits cancelled to lower the amount of money paid out for health care.
6. Cancelling for a Call: Some people will call their insurance company to get a feel how filing a claim will affect their insurance coverage. If the effect is too negative, they won't file a claim. However, just by making the call, the insured has essentially made a claim as far as the insurance company is concerned. At renewal, the insurance company can use these phone inquiries to deny claims.
Be sure to protect yourself by doing your insurance policy homework and order a copy of Ross Jurewitz's Book, The Ten Biggest Mistakes that can Destroy Your California Accident Case, which includes a section on how to buy insurance. - 9 - 10