You are a lawyer in NM?

He definitely hasn't mentioned anything about a deposition... or arbitration or mediation. Even if those are part of the process here, we just filed suit a couple months ago. Is it possible that these occur much later? He told me it would likely be over a year from now before a trial would happen.

If I get a new lawyer... who am I going to get? I'd need a lawyer who is considerably "hungrier" than this guy, and willing to do a lot of work for a *chance* at a modest reward. And then I still have to pay this guy.

Have you ever been in an accident where you were injured and received a settlement for personal injury? If so, can you briefly describe the circumstances (the accident, your injuries and treatment, lawyer or no?) and how much you received?

Because... I have a big decision to make by tomorrow...

Nearly 3 years ago I was hit directly from behind by a pickup on the highway... old guy, says he didn't see me... he stopped which was nice. Surreal experience. Thought I was dead initially, because the sensation of impact (~40mph speed differential) was insane... but 5 hrs and many x-rays later the emergency room declared that miraculously nothing was broken... just a badly wrenched back (severe spasms anytime I moved), smashed elbow, lots of bruising and soft tissue damage and a turn signal light stuck in my hip...

The guys insurance company (Geico) was very friendly and cooperative at first, and I'm not fond of lawyers and lawsuits... so I didn't get a lawyer. I got physical therapy and a lot of chiropractic treatment for my back, and seemed to be making good. A year later my elbow was still not fully healed, and I was occasionally experiencing bad back spasms which would put me down for a couple days. It was right after one of these that Geico made their friendly call to see how I was doing... and informed me that they were done paying.

After the wtf?! shock was over I eventually got a lawyer. He indicated that he thought it would be an easy case. I've continued chiropractic treatment, along with daily exercises and traction, and several deep tissue massage sessions. I have improved quite a lot in the last year. I can do nearly everything I did before the accident with relatively minor pain.

A couple months back my lawyer made an initial settlement offer of $40k. My expenses (nearly all medical) were $13k to date, so this is about 3x. The lawyer gets 1/3 which would have left me with $13k over bills for pain and suffering and future expenses. Geico countered with $15k... and wouldn't budge... until my lawyer filed suit. Now they are up to $18.5k... and my lawyer wants me to take it. After his fee and the bills that leaves me with essentially.... nothing. For whatever reason my lawyer doesn't want to mess with the case, but he won't tell me why. Well, he says it isn't worth more than that... but it seems like an incredibly lame settlement to me. After everything and likely a lifetime of dealing with a bad back and elbow, I should be getting nothing? And no, I don't have insurance that will take care of future expenses either.

You can always get a new lawyer. If you don't like/trust someone handling something like this for you, then you should find someone else.

How does that work? I signed a contract so I thought I was stuck with him... stuck with paying him at least.

And, the 6 month gap will probably work against you, because that opens the door to claims that there were other causes in the interim.

Yes... as my lawyer keeps reminding me. But it is hard for me to believe that the clear facts of the accident... that I was directly impacted on my body by a truck traveling at high speeds... would lead someone to the conclusion that I healed up perfectly, and I'm faking it... or something *else* is the cause. It was a miracle that I wasn't killed or at least more seriously injured. A 100% recovery with no lingering effects would be an additional miracle on top of that.

I told him I wanted to do it anyway... without an expert witness. Just tell the story straight up. I wouldn't feel good about hiring an "expert" anyway. The jury can use their own imagination about whether I might be faking something.

But I got to thinking about what I would like to say, and wondered if I'd be able to mention Geico at all? Because the reason why it has gone this far and why it would end up in front of a jury is because they have been real jerks. The guy who hit me is a nice guy (I've talked to him a few times) and I have no problem with him. In fact if it was just the two of us, I'm pretty sure we'd come to an agreement. But the documents do say I'm suing *him*. Am I required to pretend that the insurance company doesn't exist, and make no mention of my interactions with them?

Dude, where do you get that? Insurance defense counsel are among the lowest paid in the industry. Many GEICO lawyers are staff counsel grinding it out for less than $100,000 even after years of experience. I know because I get their resumes, and many insurance companies I work for pay less than $200 an hour. Even when I take higher end cases like nursing homes and legal malpractice cases the rate is so far below $500 an hour as to make your comment nonsense. Now, I am not saying I am not making a fine living. I am--even Obama thinks I am wealthy. But it is simply ridiculous to think that defense counsel in a rear end motor vehicle case is making $500 an hour. Where the hell do you even come up with that? Watching "The Verdict"? I guess this is how Slowtwitch works. Lots of experts out there. I just hope the training advice dispensed on this site is better than the legal advice. Somehow, although you would think it would be, I get the idea training advice is developed with the same lack of intellectual rigor as some of the posts on this thread.

Sorry to be so bitchy. Have not had my coffee yet.

I wasn't planning to do any whining at all...

So... it's reasonable for me to get nothing for pain and suffering for injuries that still aren't resolved, and be on the hook for future treatment or anything else that happens? Because that is precisely what Geico's offer amounts to.

From the anecodotes I've collected from people who have been in similar accidents, that isn't normal at all. It's normal to do much better without even getting an attorney.

So... it's reasonable for me to get nothing for pain and suffering for injuries that still aren't resolved, and be on the hook for future treatment or anything else that happens? Because that is precisely what Geico's offer amounts to.

From the anecodotes I've collected from people who have been in similar accidents, that isn't normal at all. It's normal to do much better without even getting an attorney.

Had a long talk with my lawyer yesterday... starting with saying no way on taking $18.5k, because that totally sucks, and then explaining how I understand why going forward from this point probably doesn't make financial sense for *him*... but I want to go to a jury trial if necessary and I need him to prepare a good case and back me up. He dismissed the idea that he cared about the money (sure), and stated that it actually didn't make financial sense for *me*. He thought a jury verdict in the $20-$30k range was most likely, and could be less.... and that I'd accumulate a bunch of expenses in addition... especially if I hired an "expert witness" to state that the physical damage would likely cause issues for the rest of my life. I'd have to pay these expenses myself. In addition in NM if the jury award is *less* than the offer I got from Geico, I'd have to pay 2x Geico's expenses for going to trial. So if something weird happens, and the jury doesn't give me anything because they think riding a bike on the road is insane and an accident waiting to happen, I could end up really deep in the hole.

I told him I wanted to do it anyway... without an expert witness. Just tell the story straight up. I wouldn't feel good about hiring an "expert" anyway. The jury can use their own imagination about whether I might be faking something.

But I got to thinking about what I would like to say, and wondered if I'd be able to mention Geico at all? Because the reason why it has gone this far and why it would end up in front of a jury is because they have been real jerks. The guy who hit me is a nice guy (I've talked to him a few times) and I have no problem with him. In fact if it was just the two of us, I'm pretty sure we'd come to an agreement. But the documents do say I'm suing *him*. Am I required to pretend that the insurance company doesn't exist, and make no mention of my interactions with them?

Also, since you have experience working for insurance companies... My lawyer is now telling me that he thinks they will go all the way to a trial as a matter of policy. Even if they lose a good bit of money on one case it will send a message to the industry that they are tough to deal with, which will end up saving them money in the long run.

What are Geico's lawyer's incentives on a case (are they paid hourly, or via some formula that considers the case outcome?) and are they the ones making major decisions, or do they need to get everything approved by administrators?

Oh... and about the "advice" dispensed on this site. The signal to noise ratio on this board is often very low... like the rest of the internet.