
CHALLENGING GEICO’S “BUSINESS USE” POLICY EXCLUSION FOR POLICE OFFICER’S CRUISER CRASH
GEICO initially denied our police client’s claim arguing his operation of a cruiser was a “business use”. We took GEICO to court.
GEICO initially denied our police client’s claim arguing his operation of a cruiser was a “business use”. We took GEICO to court.
The responsible party had limited insurance coverage. Thankfully, the firefighter’s personal auto insurance provided additional protection.
How the legal elimination of the “firefighter’s rule” and “assumption of risk” defense affects public safety officers …
X-rays, CT scans, and ultrasound reveal little to no fluid, but doctors proceed with chest tube anyway. This is medical malpractice.
A few years ago, I wrote about Arthur Vee’s case. Arthur was riding his motorcycle when he was cut off by a motorist who was turning left into a gas station. Arthur suffered horrific, permanent injuries to his leg. The defendant operator had $250,000 of coverage on his auto policy; however, I discovered after filing a lawsuit that this defendant also had a $1,000,000 excess
I secured an expert report from Mr. Sampson’s own surgeon, which confirmed the injuries, subsequent treatment, and permanent impairment were all caused by this incident.