Occasionally at Crosley Law Firm, we acquire cases from other attorneys. Sometimes people make the deliberate choice to get new representation; other times, extenuating circumstances end up leading clients to our firm. In this case, our client’s former attorney became ill and could not keep up with his case load, and from the first day we met Mr. Lozano, we knew we had to help.
Mr. Lozano had spent his life working difficult, laborious, physically-demanding jobs in order to support his family. On his drive home one day, he was rear ended and began suffering from back pain immediately after the collision as a result of his injuries. The other driver was at fault, and Mr. Lozano was definitely injured in the crash; while this may seem like a clear-cut case, it ended up being anything but.
The first complication in this case arose from the fact that Mr. Lozano experienced several other documented injuries after the crash, such as a fall, that also caused further harm to his back. Another complication arose because Mr. Lozano received major back surgery over a year and a half after the crash. These physical problems also meant that he could no longer continue working at his demanding job.
Of course, we knew that Mr. Lozano’s subsequent back injuries were more severe as a result of the damage his body sustained from the car crash; we also knew that his surgery and early retirement would not have been necessary if he had not been injured in that collision. Of course, the other side did not agree.
At the time Crosley Law Firm took on Mr. Lozano’s case, the insurance company was making no offers to settle the claim. They saw his surgery as a direct result of the other injuries he sustained and claimed that neither the surgery nor his subsequent injuries had any relation to the crash. Although it’s not uncommon for people who have been hurt to experience subsequent injuries and require surgery months or even years after an initial injury event, the other side in a claim often asks why they waited so long to get medical treatment. In many cases, that is a tough point to argue against and puts those who have been injured at a disadvantage in settlement negotiations or in a trial.
Anticipating this objection to settling Mr. Lozano’s claim, we met with his treating surgeon and went over all the medical history, imaging results, and other evidence tying the surgery to the car wreck. The surgeon agreed with us and wrote a report, which significantly strengthened the case and confirmed what we already knew and that the insurance company was trying to deny: Mr. Lozano’s subsequent injuries were aggravated by the initial damage to his back sustained in the car crash, and requiring surgery was also direct result of the crash.
Armed with this and other compelling evidence, we made a demand for policy limits and gave the insurance company 30 days to evaluate it. The day the deadline came, the insurer wanted an extension. We knew the facts of the case and knew that Mr. Lozano justly deserved to be compensated for his injuries, so we refused to grant an extension.
Just a few hours before the deadline, the insurance company offered half of the policy limit as a settlement. Again, we refused.
Finally, just a few minutes before the deadline, the insurance company agreed to pay the full policy limit.
This settlement will help Mr. Lozano get the additional medical treatment he needs for ongoing complications associated with his back injury, and it will at least partially make up for his inability to work in the future.
This case perfectly illustrates the dedication and resolve that our clients – and the insurance companies – have come to expect from Crosley Law Firm. We pursue every lead, investigate every shred of evidence, and use our expertise to determine every source of compensation for our clients. If you’ve been injured as a result of someone else’s carelessness or negligence, don’t hesitate: contact Crosley Law Firm today to set up your free case review and consultation.
