No-Fault insurance lawyer shares additional tips on what Michigan’s new auto accident law means for car accident victims and personal injury attorneys

This is part two on topics and ideas that I’ll be covering today and tomorrow at the No-Fault Institute Seminar for the Michigan Association for Justice in Southfield. Yesterday, I discussed the objective manifestation requirement and the need to change Michigan’s jury instruction, now that the definition of objective manifestation has been changed with McCormick v. Carrier.  I also discussed how personal injury attorneys would do well to still provide objective proof of physical injuries at trial, even if the legal requirement for doing so has changed after McCormick.

Personal injury lawyer Steven Gursten teaches what McCormick v. Carrier means for accident victims and lawyers at Michigan Association for Justice legal seminar in Southfield

Michigan has an important new auto accident law that will result in enormous changes in the months ahead for car accident victims, personal injury lawyers for both the plaintiff and defense of these accident claims, and the auto insurance companies in this state. The new law was released by the Michigan Supreme Court on August 1, 2010, and the case is McCormick v. Carrier.

Dr. Mary Kneiser’s IME lawsuit is strong example of independent medical examiner abuse

This is the last post in my mini series of blogs on independent medical examiners. Mary Kneiser is a busy IME doctor, and has been for many years. Dr. Kneiser has been hired by auto insurance companies and personal injury defense law firms to do one time “examinations” of injured plaintiffs, write reports and testify. Ask any experienced personal injury attorney about her, and you will get an earful.

Personal injury attorney says Traverse City newspaper article puts Michigan Supreme Court partisan judges in their place

The Traverse City Record-Eagle ran an editorial the other day that I wish could be required reading for every Michigan voter.  Because behind the auto insurance company propaganda campaign threatening to raise insurance rates after the McCormick v. Carrier decision last week, there lies a simple truth that has been ignored by almost every newspaper in Michigan.

Attorney boils down the new 100+ page Michigan Supreme Court case McCormick v. Carrier for lawyers

One week ago, the Michigan Supreme Court restored common sense to the state’s auto accident law with its ruling on McCormick v. Carrier, an auto accident case from Flint.  McCormick v. Carrier overturned Kreiner v Fischer, and returned important legal rights to potentially hundreds of car accident victims who were told by Michigan lawyers that they did not have a case under the old auto law as interpreted - incorrectly - by the Kreiner Court. Over the past week, nearly every personal injury lawyer, insurance claims adjuster, and trial judge has been scrambling trying to figure out what this decision, weighing in at more than 100 pages, really means for people injured in car accidents in Michigan.

Personal injury lawyer’s observations based upon yesterday’s MDTC seminar for attorneys defending car accident cases in Michigan

I’ll be speaking on September 1, 2010 to the Michigan Association for Justice (MAJ) - formerly the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association - and again on October 1 for the State Bar of Michigan and the Institute of Continuing Legal Education annual meeting in Grand Rapids on my thoughts on how the recent case of McCormick v. Carrier will change how car accident lawyers in Michigan practice. So, I thought it would be fun to listen in and hear what the defense bar is saying to its members and the insurance adjusters that defend auto accident claims at yesterday’s Michigan Defense Trial Counsel seminar.

New auto law promises hope and a second chance for hundreds of Michigan car accident victims who were told they did not have cases

Rodney McCormick v. Larry Carrier and Allied Automotive Group, Indemnitor of General Motors Corp. was released just before midnight on Sunday, August 1, 2010. Here are my initial thoughts on the impact this important Michigan Supreme Court case will have for car accident victims, the insurance industry, and Michigan personal injury lawyers - including auto lawyers who help accident victims and those who do insurance defense work on auto negligence claims.

Auto accident attorney interprets Michigan’s new auto law, which could give hundreds of car accident victims with serious personal injuries a second chance to have their pain and suffering cases heard in court

I’d like to share the exciting news.  Sometime between now and Sunday, the Michigan Supreme Court will release McCormick v. Carrier (Rodney McCormick v. Larry Carrier and Allied Automotive Group, Indemnitor of General Motors Corp.).

McCormick is the case that Michigan auto accident victims, lawyers on both sides and almost all trial court judges have been hoping will finally reverse the shocking unfairness that has resulted under Kreiner v. Fischer.

I’d like to give a sincere congratulations to partner Bobby Raitt and trial attorney Alison Tomak. They won a trial for a personal injury accident that occurred in Waterford, Michigan. The verdict was returned in Oakland County Circuit Court today.

Michigan traumatic brain injury lawyer discusses the promise of blood biomarkers for TBI victims

I read an article in Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal that promises hope to traumatic brain injury victims and survivors and the TBI lawyers who help them in America’s courtrooms.

The article is a must read for any lawyer who represents people who have suffered traumatic brain injury.  What makes the article notable is that it discusses how serious traumatic brain injuries can be, how difficult TBI is to diagnose, how emergency rooms and doctors often miss many of the subtle symptoms of TBI, and how this delay in diagnosis leads both to improper treatment and sometimes catastrophic consequences for accident victims who have suffered serious closed-head injuries.