Steve Gursten of Michigan Auto Law will teach other injury attorneys and negligence lawyers at the State Bar of Michigan seminar in Grand Rapids, exactly what the new Michigan Supreme Court case McCormick v. Carrier means
Over the past two months, nearly every personal injury lawyer, insurance claims adjuster, and trial judge has been scrambling trying to figure out what McCormick v. Carrier, weighing in at more than 100 pages, really means for people injured in car accidents in Michigan, as well as the attorneys who fight for them.
I’m going to help my fellow personal injury lawyers better understand this landmark case, during the State Bar of Michigan annual meeting this Thursday and Friday in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I will also be giving a presentation to the State Bar section of negligence lawyers. My presentation is called, “Representing Injured Personal Injury Victims and Finding Value in Car Accident Claims After McCormick v. Carrier.”
Thanks to the Michigan Supreme Court August 1, 2010 ruling in McCormick v. Carrier, potentially thousands of Michigan auto accident victims who were seriously injured yet were told they had no case under the state’s harsh auto accident law, now have a second chance to bring pain and suffering lawsuits.
McCormick has overturned Michigan’s previous (and the nation’s harshest) auto accident threshold law Kreiner v. Fischer, opening the door for more fair lawsuits by people seeking compensation after being injured in auto accidents. Under McCormick v. Carrier, people who seek compensation for injuries and pain and suffering have a better chance at a fair recovery. The case says a person can qualify for pain and suffering damages if his or her normal life is affected – not completely altered by a car accident, as Kreiner required.
My presentation won’t just cover the basics of McCormick v. Carrier. I’ll be discussing tips to increase the value of car accident cases with McCormick’s new requirements, important developments in No-Fault benefits, insurance adjuster issues, as well as some key new cases, such as Miller v. Citizens and Leuker v. Auto Owners Insurance.
I’ll also cover what’s gone after Kreiner v. Fischer. Kreiner was responsible for the worst possible public policy in Michigan. What made the old law under Kreiner so frustrating for lawyers was that the focus on duration and temporal factors meant that people who suffered very serious injuries of near total incapacitation but shorter duration were punished, as were good people who tried, despite the pain and medical restrictions of their injuries, to gut it out and try to get back to work as quickly as possible.
For those negligence lawyers who will not be at the State Bar of Michigan legal seminar in Grand Rapids, you can take a look at my McCormick v Carrier outline. Here, I lay out the test anyone in Michigan who has been injured in a car accident must meet to recover pain and suffering damages. I’ve also posted a dozen blogs this week containing supporting documentation that I referenced in my presentation.
– Steve Gursten is recognized as one of the nation’s top auto negligence lawyers handling serious car and truck accident injury cases and insurance No-Fault litigation. Steve speaks and writes extensively on McCormick v. Carrier and is available for comment.
Related information on McCormick v. Carrier and Michigan’s auto laws:
Michigan No-Fault insurance law
Michigan Auto Law is the leading and largest law firm exclusively handling car accident, truck accident and motorcycle accident cases throughout the entire state for more than 50 years. Michigan Auto Law also has an office in Grand Rapids. Visit our Grand Rapids Auto Accident Resource Center for more information after a crash, such as car accident basics and Grand Rapids crash statistics and local resources.
