Mr. Jordan Namerow, a Philadelphia car accident lawyer, recently settled a car accident case for his client who had limited tort. Mr. Namerow was able to obtain the full policy limit from the at-fault driver as a result of the injuries and damages sustained by his client.
Limited Tort and Full Tort
In Pennsylvania, when drivers purchase auto insurance policies, a type of coverage they must choose between is limited tort or full tort.
Limited tort limits injured drivers’ legal rights to sue at-fault or negligent drivers for non-economic damages called pain and suffering. However, they may sue for economic damages such as lost wages, medical expenses and other out of pocket expenses.
Full tort does not affect injured drivers’ legal rights to sue for non-economic damages. In addition to being able to recover economic damages, full tort drivers may also sue for pain and suffering damages.
Exceptions to Limited Tort
Pennsylvania car accident law provides certain exceptions for limited tort. If any of the exceptions apply, then a limited tort driver injured in a car accident can sue for pain and suffering damages. In other words, the limited tort driver is deemed to have full tort if an exception applies. Click here to see a detailed discussion about limited tort exceptions.
Recent Case Where Limited Tort Driver Deemed to Have Full Tort
Mr. Namerow represented a woman who had limited tort and was injured in a car accident in Philadelphia. Mr. Namerow was able to settle the case against the at-fault driver for the full policy limit.
Mr. Namerow’s client was traveling on Roosevelt Boulevard in Philadelphia on her way to meet a client. She was stopped at a red light when the at-fault driver suddenly slammed into her from behind. As a result, Mr. Namerow’s client’s head struck the steering wheel, and her body was thrown back and forth in her vehicle. The client sustained serious injuries.
The negligent driver admitted he was at fault and stated that he was dozing in and out of sleep in his vehicle. As such, he failed to observe traffic conditions and struck the client’s vehicle.
At-Fault Driver Operating an Out of State Vehicle
Although liability was not in dispute, limited tort was a defense the defendant presented. One of the exceptions to limited tort is if the at-fault driver was operating a vehicle that is registered in another state. In this case, the defendant was driving a New Jersey vehicle. Therefore, Mr. Namerow’s client was deemed to have full tort.
Client Sustained Serious Injuries
Immediately following the impact, Mr. Namerow’s client complained of headache and neck pain. She was sent to the emergency room. Diagnostics tests fortunately showed no fractures in her neck. She was diagnosed with a head injury and a cervical strain. She was also told to follow up with her primary physician.
Unfortunately, the pain and stiffness in her neck and head was unrelenting. The pain spread to her shoulder and she sought further treatment. She was prescribed physical therapy three times a week and was also given medication.
She had episodes of pain and numbness when active with certain activities and while lifting objects. She also complained of pain and numbness down her right arm to her finger tips. Due to her symptoms, an MRI was ordered and results showed that she had bulging discs in her neck which were causing her pain.
She had 5 months of physical therapy with minimal improvement and was sent for neurological evaluation. Namerow’s client continued with therapy and was ultimately discharged. However, she still has bouts of spasms and pain which are aggravated by lifting and other activities.
Mr. Namerow Obtains Maximum Recovery for His Client
In the end, Mr. Namerow was able to obtain the full policy limit from the at-fault driver as a result of the injuries and damages sustained by his client.
Other Philadelphia Car Accident Results
$250,000 Settlement in UIM Car Accident Case in Philadelphia
Our client was injured in a car accident after a phantom vehicle caused him to lose control of his car and hit a concrete barrier on the highway. After numerous submissions to the auto carrier to substantiate the client’s injuries and contentious negotiations, we were able to secure a settlement of the uninsured/underinsured motorist claim totaling $250,000.00.
Philadelphia SEPTA Bus and Car Accident – Bus Passenger Received Maximum Recovery
Our client, a SEPTA bus passenger, was injured when a vehicle struck the SEPTA bus. Our client sustained soft tissue injuries and underwent several months of physical therapy. Our Philadelphia personal injury lawyers were able to secure the maximum recovery possible from the insurance company of the at-fault driver’s vehicle.
Pedestrian Struck by Car in Philadelphia – Successful UIM Claim
Our client was struck by a car while crossing the street in front of a SEPTA trolley. As a result, our client sustained a concussion and soft tissue injuries. Because the car did not stop after it hit the pedestrian, we filed an uninsured motorist (UM) claim on behalf of our client. We were able to recover pain and suffering damages, lost wages and other losses associated with the accident.
*Disclaimer: This website does not create any attorney-client relationship or provide legal advice. Namerow Law provides legal advice only after accepting a case. It is imperative that any action taken is done on advice of counsel. Since each case is unique, discussion of prior outcomes and settlements in past cases is no guarantee of a similar outcome in current or future cases. Contacting the law firm via the email contact form on this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through the contact form.