car accident lawyer

[TheReverend]

Can anyone recommend a top tier lawyer for car accident DEFENCE lawyer (we are being sued)
also a good PI to get me some proof the guy is a fraud.
thanks

[Crossfire]

Isn't your insurance company providing an attorney for you?

[TheReverend]

They will. I'm just not sure how much I should trust these guys. Wouldn't I be better of with a top tier lawyer that works for ME and not for the insurance company?

[marksiwel]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

[The Annoyed Man]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

...versus having to pay the lawyer out of your own pocket regardless of the settlement amount...

You're kind of hosed either way if it comes to that.

[marksiwel]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

...versus having to pay the lawyer out of your own pocket regardless of the settlement amount...

You're kind of hosed either way if it comes to that.

The only people who win, are the Lawyers...

[TheReverend]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

...versus having to pay the lawyer out of your own pocket regardless of the settlement amount...

You're kind of hosed either way if it comes to that.

I agree with what you say but I'm so irritated I prefer paying to the lawyer and not to the liar...

[Charles L. Cotton]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

That won't happen. If the case can't be settled within policy limits, then the insured can be at risk for an "excess judgment" meaning a judgment that is higher than policy limits.

Chas.

[ELB]

Based on my general life experience, such as it is, my inherent disdain for how the tort system operates, and the sum total (as a juror) of two civil cases that were "independent" lawyers on behalf of a driver suing someone and their insurance lawyers...

Stick with the insurance company lawyers. They will be sharp, prepared, have lots of experience backing them up at the company office. And they are smart. And dress better. Insurance companies don't hire fools who fork over the policy limits and then some very often, and when they do, they fire them. By the time the individual has hired a lawyer and discovered he is a fool, it is in the middle of the trial and it is too late. Certainly the company lawyers have the company as their first client, but as long as you are also the company's client, your interests are aligned. If you were doing something that puts you outside your policy coverage, you got problems, but since it just sounds like you "have a choice," I'd stick with the company. It is one of the things you've been paying them for all this time.

In both trials that I sat a juror, it was obvious right off the bat who the "company" lawyers were, even though we weren't told an insurance company was involved. There were two of them, and as I noted above, they dressed well. In the first case, the plaintiff's lawyer was pretty good (and dressed well!) for a lone wolf, but the insurance guys generally played it cool still got a hung jury. In the second, the plaintiff's lawyer looked and acted...desperate. He did a lousy job in court, dumped evidence on us in the jury room that he didn't explain in court, and basically hosed his client. Technically he won, but the judgement was for $300 (three-hundred). His cut of that wouldn't even buy him a new sport jacket, which he desperately needed, and of course did squat for his client.

Grisham writes lots of novels of the poor, underpaid, but noble and savvy street attorney slaying the huge unfeeling corporate goliath attorney, but I'll bet the reality is somewhat different...

Keep us posted and good luck.

edited after I discovered I couldn't spell "desperate".

[marksiwel]

What you got to worry about is they may settle for something higher than your covered for and you will have to pay the balance.

That won't happen. If the case can't be settled within policy limits, then the insured can be at risk for an "excess judgment" meaning a judgment that is higher than policy limits.

Chas.

I stand corrected, thanks Chas, legal matters make me dizzy

[TheReverend]

Based on my general life experience, such as it is, my inherent disdain for how the tort system operates, and the sum total (as a juror) of two civil cases that were "independent" lawyers on behalf of a driver suing someone and their insurance lawyers...

Stick with the insurance company lawyers. They will be sharp, prepared, have lots of experience backing them up at the company office. And they are smart. And dress better. Insurance companies don't hire fools who fork over the policy limits and then some very often, and when they do, they fire them. By the time the individual has hired a lawyer and discovered he is a fool, it is in the middle of the trial and it is too late. Certainly the company lawyers have the company as their first client, but as long as you are also the company's client, your interests are aligned. If you were doing something that puts you outside your policy coverage, you got problems, but since it just sounds like you "have a choice," I'd stick with the company. It is one of the things you've been paying them for all this time.

In both trials that I sat a juror, it was obvious right off the bat who the "company" lawyers were, even though we weren't told an insurance company was involved. There were two of them, and as I noted above, they dressed well. In the first case, the plaintiff's lawyer was pretty good (and dressed well!) for a lone wolf, but the insurance guys generally played it cool still got a hung jury. In the second, the plaintiff's lawyer looked and acted...desparate. He did a lousy job in court, dumped evidence on us in the jury room that he didn't explain in court, and basically hosed his client. Technically he won, but the judgement was for $300 (three-hundred). His cut of that wouldn't even buy him a new sport jacket, which he desparately needed, and of course did squat for his client.

Grisham writes lots of novels of the poor, underpaid, but noble and savvy street attorney slaying the huge unfeeling corporate goliath attorney, but I'll bet the reality is somewhat different...

Keep us posted and good luck.

Thanks ELB, you kind of gave me some hope here. I sure hope I get one of thoe experienced lawyers and not a newbe...
I'll make sure to keep y'all posted.