San Francisco, California personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued the Defendants on auto negligence theories.

On August 18, 2002, Marc Holland ("Holland") rented a 2002 Ford Escort from ERAC-SF. ( See Duley Decl., filed October 22, 2004, Ex. 5; Watt Decl., filed November 5, 2004, Ex. B.) At the time Holland rented the subject vehicle, his driver's license was suspended

San Francisco, California insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

An insurance company has a legal duty to uphold its obligations under the terms of the policy. If they fail to do so, they breach the contract and may be liable for damages. A bad-faith breach of contract claim, generally, must be brought within four years

San Jose, California insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

An insurance company has a legal duty to uphold its obligations under the terms of the policy. If they fail to do so, they breach the contract and may be liable for damages. A bad-faith breach of contract claim, generally, must be brought within four years from

Los Angeles, California personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on a negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, 23STCV22093, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

There are four basic elements of negligence under California state law: duty, breach, causation, and damages. Duty demonstrates the expectation to use reas

Los Angeles, California insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

An insurance company has a legal duty to uphold its obligations under the terms of the policy. If they fail to do so, they breach the contract and may be liable for damages. A bad-faith breach of contract claim, generally, must be brought within four years fr

San Diego, California personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

Comparative Negligence in California Under this law, the amount of compensation an injured party can receive is determined by their level of fault in relation to the accident. For example, if a court determines that the injured party is 20% at fault, their total damages award will

San Diego, California insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

This case was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, 37-02023-0004190-CU-BC-CTL, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

An insurance company has a legal duty to uphold its obligations under the terms of the policy.

Phoenix, Arizona personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case as filed in the Maricopa County Superior Court, CV2023-008744, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Arizona operates under a “comparative fault” rule, meaning that if someone is entirely to blame for the auto accident, they must take care of the r

Pierre, South Dakota personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

In South Dakota, car accident liability is primarily determined based on fault. This means that the party responsible for causing the accident is typically held liable for the resulting damages. This is because South Dakota follows a modified comparative negligence rule.

Fargo, North Dakota personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

North Dakota is a modified comparative negligence state It allocates fault to all parties involved, thus reducing how much each party can recover from the car accident. Since North Dakota is a modified comparative negligence state, drivers can claim damages so long as they were only

Fargo, North Dakota personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the Morton County Court, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

North Dakota is a modified comparative negligence state It allocates fault to all parties involved, thus reducing how much each party can recover from the car a

Minneapolis, Minnesota personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

Minnesota follows the “comparative negligence” rule. Under this system, a plaintiff's compensation can be reduced by a percentage that equals their share of fault in causing the accident. If a plaintiff is found to be more than 50% at fault, they are barred from recovering d

Minneapolis, Minnesota personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendants on auto negligence theories.

Minnesota follows the “comparative negligence” rule. Under this system, a plaintiff's compensation can be reduced by a percentage that equals their share of fault in causing the accident. If a plaintiff is found to be more than 50% at fault, they are barred fro

Minneapolis, Minnesota insurance law lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

604.18 INSURANCE STANDARD OF CONDUCT.
Subdivision 1.Terms.

For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them.

(a) "Insurance policy" means a written agreement between an insured and an insurer t

Minneapolis, Minnesota insurance law lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

604.18 INSURANCE STANDARD OF CONDUCT.
Subdivision 1.Terms.

For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them.

(a) "Insurance policy" means a written agreement between an insured and an insurer that obligates

Kansas City, Missouri personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a premises liability negligence theory.

Missouri is a pure comparative negligence state. The law allows you to sue for damages even if you are 99 percent at fault for your own injuries. However, as in the example above, a jury will reduce your award by your percentage of fault.

Kansas City, Missouri personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, 2316-CV23414, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Missouri follows a comparative negligence principle which means even if you're partially at fault for an accident, you can still receive

Springfield, Missouri insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiffs who sued on bad faith breach of insurance contract theories.

This case was filed in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, 2231-CC00924, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

To prove a bad faith refusal to settle claim, the plaintiff must show the insurer reserved the exclusive right to con

St. Louis, Missouri personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, 23SL-CC02908, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Missouri follows a comparative negligence principle which means even if you're partially at fault for an accident, you can still re

El Dorado, Arkansas personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on an auto negligence theory.

Negligence, the legal theory behind most injury lawsuits, is the violation of a duty owed to another individual. In other words, to do something (or not do something) a "reasonable person" wouldn't (or would) do -- such as driving drunk or failing to ensure the safety

Fort Smith, Arkansas insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

This case was filed in the Circuit Court, Sebastian County, Arkansas, 66FCV-23-01157, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

The elements on a bad faith claim in Arkansas are:

Plaintiff has sustained damages, the insurance company a

Little Rock, Arkansas personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

Negligence, the legal theory behind most injury lawsuits, is the violation of a duty owed to another individual. In other words, to do something (or not do something) a "reasonable person" wouldn't (or would) do -- such as driving drunk or failing to ensure the safety

Little Rock, Arkansas insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sue on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

This case was filled in the Circuit Court, Pulaski County, 60CV-23-05894, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

The elements on a bad faith claim in Arkansas are:

Plaintiff has sustained damages, the insurance company acted in bad

East St. Louis, Illinois personal injury track wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on an auto negligence theory.

Illinois has adopted modified comparative negligence (735 ILCS 5/2-1116) as the standard for recovery of damages. Under modified comparative negligence, an injured party may recover damages only if he/she is less than 50% at fault for the injury or dam

Peoria, Illinois personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

Illinois has adopted modified comparative negligence (735 ILCS 5/2-1116) as the standard for recovery of damages. Under modified comparative negligence, an injured party may recover damages only if he/she is less than 50% at fault for the injury or damages.