On November 8, 2016, our client was riding as a passenger in a vehicle owned and operated by her sister. The vehicle in which our client was a passenger was traveling east on Route 40 in Pittsylvania County, Virginia when a young 17-year-old boy was traveling on south Route 640, Renan Road toward its intersection with Route 40.
The 17-year-old boy had a stop sign and, instead of obeying the traffic sign, drove straight through it at 50 miles per hour colliding with the car in which our client was a passenger. Our client’s sister was traveling at the speed limit on Route 40. The Trooper who investigated the wreck indicated on his police report that your insured “disregarded stop of yield sign” while for our client’s sister he indicated “no improper action.”
This wreck happened in the daytime at about 3:55 p.m. There were no adverse weather conditions and the road was straight and dry. There was no reason for the defendant to blow through that stop sign and strike the vehicle in which our client was a passenger on the driver side.
The impact could easily be described as violent. The collision sent the car in which my client was a passenger into a spin where it struck a stop sign and a street sign and came to rest on the south shoulder of Route 40.
The Virginia State Bar requires that we give a disclaimer whenever we talk about case results. As we are sure you already know, the case result described above must be read in context with the unique facts of this particular case. Each case result depends upon a variety of factors unique to each case, which is why we describe those facts in detail. To be clear, this case result does not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case undertaken by the lawyers at Osterbind Law, PLLC.
Our client was transported by EMS to Centra – Gretna Medical Center for evaluation. According to the EMS report, our client was found sitting in the passenger seat of the vehicle with major front-end damage. The ER physicians took x-rays and discovered that our client suffered an oblique fracture of the distal fibula with a travers fracture of the medial malleolus.
She was then transported to Lynchburg General Hospital for admission. She was supposed to be discharged on November 12, 2016, but she developed complications from the surgery and she developed hypertension, tachycardia, and mild leukocytosis. She was placed on IV antibiotics and her symptoms resolved within 24 hours.
Our client was discharged on November 15, 2016, after seven days, and transferred to Heritage Hall in stable condition and she was non-weight bearing on both feet. At that point, her pain was being managed by Dilaudid and she was given orders for physical therapy and occupational therapy. She was transferred to Heritage Hall for acute rehab where she stayed until she was discharged on December 7, 2016.
Our client followed up as directed with OrthoVirginia several times after her surgery and she has slowly improved and was released to bear weight on both of her ankles on January 4, 2017. However, she was ordered to continue using her moon boot on the right ankle. Her pain will continue indefinitely.
Our client incurred $47,149.76 in medical expenses and $8,865.20 in lost wages due to her injuries relating to this car wreck and this young man’s avoidable negligence.
The young man who caused the wreck was on his dad’s insurance policy (Progressive) which had limits of $50,000. He also lived back and forth with his mother and her insurance policy (Esurance) carried with it another $25,000 in liability policy limits. The car in which our client was a passenger was insured by State Farm but it only had $50,000 in underinsured motorist coverage. Our client was insured by Allstate for another $50,000 in underinsured motorist coverage.
All of this just might make your head spin, but there is a reason I tell you all of this. Two separate liability insurance policies, in this case, dad’s and mom’s policies, can stack on top of each other to create $75,000 of liability coverage.
For underinsured motorist coverage, you can only recover to the extent you are underinsured. In this case, our client was insured up to $75,000 because the Progressive and Esurance policies stack on top of each other. However, we were able to stack the two $50,000 UIM policies together to add up to $100,000 in coverage.
When it comes to recovering financially, our client needed us to find all of the available insurance policies and force each company to pay to the maximum extent. If you need help making sense of it all, give us a call to discuss your case.
The Virginia State Bar requires that we give a disclaimer whenever we talk about case results. As we are sure you already know, the case result described above must be read in context with the unique facts of this particular case. Each case result depends upon a variety of factors unique to each case, which is why we describe those facts in detail. To be clear, this case result does not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case undertaken by the lawyers at Osterbind Law, PLLC.
