July 7th, 2019 Posted by Spencer ParrPersonal Injury 0 comments on “How The ‘Made Whole Doctrine’ Affects Personal Injury Subrogation Cases In Washington”
What is right of subrogation?
Often times in personal injury matters an insurance company gains a right of subrogation. This is the right to either stand in the shoes of their insured and sue the at-fault party who is responsible for the insurance company’s losses or receive a portion of the proceeds to cover their settlement if the insured sues the at-fault party directly and wins. The problem becomes that in some instances, insurance companies have attempted to put their own subrogation interests ahead of the insured’s interests in achieving a full financial recovery.
Washington state’s Made Whole Doctrine generally establishes the priority for the interests of insured individuals where there is conflict with the interests of their own insurance company. In Thiringer v. American Motor Insurance Co., the Washington Supreme Court articulated the Made Whole Doctrine as a general rule as follows:
Beltran-Serrano v. City of Tacoma, No 95062-8, was decided by the Washington Supreme Court on June 13, 2019. The decision holds that a police officer’s use of deadly force may be actionable both under a negligence theory relating to the circumstances leading up to a police shooting and under an intentional tort theory based on the officer’s decision to actually pull the trigger. In such cases, plaintiffs must remain aware of Washington civil procedure, including CR 8(e)(2), which allows the plaintiff to plead “as many separate claims or defenses as the party has regardless of consistency.” A plaintiff must therefore plead both theories when attempting to sue a police officer or municipality for unlawful use of force.
If you have been injured on the job you know how difficult it can be to feel heard. At times, your doctor doesn’t seem to be listening anymore even after you followed all the instructions to get better. Why does it feel like he or she doesn’t care anymore and what can you do to fix it?
Most doctors care deeply about their patients and want to do everything possible to help them heal and return to full-time employment. But doctors are human too, and their job has similarities to any other. After years of fighting with L&I, you can expect your doctor to get a little tired of filling out endless forms, dealing with their treatment guidelines, and having their suggestions being ignored or denied. So how can you help support your doctor and keep your L&I claim on track?
As an elevator passenger, your only concern should be with getting where we need to go floor wise. Typically, you do not assess whether or not the mechanics of an elevator are in prime working condition. Too often they are not and this can lead to a life-changing elevator injury that occurs in an instant.
An elevator that is misleveled or has unsafe components, such as old or faulty parts, is very often found to be the source of elevator accidents resulting in an injury. If an elevator cab sits even a fraction of an inch above or below the floor, passengers getting in and out of the elevator are at risk of tripping and falling.
There are a number of very precise movements and parts that need to be tested and calibrated regularly for the safe transport of people in elevators. Perhaps the most terrifying is a fatal accident that can occur from a lack of proper maintenance that results in a cab drop where an elevator falls uncontrollably from a tall distance.
Do I need to go to an IME for my personal injury lawsuit?
You filed a lawsuit for your personal injury and now your attorney is asking when you’re available for an IME or independent medical examination. A natural first instinct is to question why you need to be examined by a doctor who does not know you or your medical history. Medical examinations are inherently personal and can be a bit intrusive. It’s reasonable for someone to have concerns about divulging their medical information to someone whom they are unfamiliar, so why is this happening?