April 2004 BenGlassLaw Electronic Newsletter

by Ben Glass Ben@BenGlassLaw.com

Ben Glass is a Virginia personal injury and medical malpractice attorney

As you can see, we have changed the format of our
\nelectronc newsletter, and gone a little bit more "high
\ntech." Frankly, this will automate the subscriber
\nand "de-subscriber" process. (There are so many
\nsubscribers it was getting unwieldy.) I hope that you
\nenjoy this newsletter. If you do, pass it along to
\nsomeone who might also enjoy it.
\n
\nSo take a look around. If we are waisting your time just
\nhit the unsubscribe button at the bottom and your
\nname and email address will be permanently deleted. If
\nyou do like it please pass it on to someone you know.
\nLet us know what topics you would like to see covered.
\nIf you have a question, please feel free to email us.
\n
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nin this issue
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\n* Visit Our Famous Web Site
\n* VTLA Vice-President Sandra Rohrstaff Joins the Firm
\n* Insurance the Automobile Companies Don't Want You To Know About
\n* Ben Glass to Speak in NC on ERISA Reimbursement Litigation
\n* Discrimination in the Emergency Department
\n* Just How Good Is Your Hospital?
\n* Read This Case if You Deal With ERISA Liens!
\n
\n
\nVisit Our Famous Web Site
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nRecently our website was featured in a national legal
\npublication. Visit to see why it gets over 50,000 hits
\nper month.
\n
\nVist our website >> http://www.benglasslaw.com
\n
\nVTLA Vice-President Sandra Rohrstaff Joins the Firm
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nWe are very proud to announce that very experienced
\npersonal injury attorney Sandra
\nRohrstaff has joined our firm. Sandra is a very
\nexperienced personal injury attorney who most recently
\nworked for a firm that specialized in pharmaceutical
\nlitigation--representing people injured by drugs such as
\nPhen Fen.
\n
\nAt the recent Virginia Trial Lawyers Association
\nconvention Sandra was nominated to be a vice-
\npresident of the association. This is the first time since
\nthe 1980's that a women has been nominated to that
\nposition. Sandra's nomination is a tribute to her hard
\nwork for VTLA and to her excellence as a trial attorney.
\n
\n
\n
\nInsurance the Automobile Companies Don't Want You To Know About
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nA: What would you do if you were injured in an
\nautomobile only to find out that the driver who hurt you
\nhad no automobile insurance? Virginia, like many states,
\ndoes not require drivers to have automobile insurance.
\nEven in states where insurance is required, many
\ndrivers are minimally insured. Many look no further than
\nwhat the monthly premiums will be in order to determine
\nwhat amount of liability coverage to buy. They simply
\ndo not care if they hurt someone.You can protect
\nyourself.
\nReview your own automobile insurance policy. You will
\nfind a "declarations page" which lists the various
\ncoverages you have along with the premiums you are
\npaying for each. If you cannot find your declarations
\npage, call your agent and get her to send you a
\ncopy.The two most important items on that page are
\nthe limits of the liability coverage and the
\nuninsured/underinsured motorist coverages. It will
\nusually say something like $25,000/$50,000, or
\n$100,000/$300,000 or $300,000/$500,000.
\nNext, try to call and get a quote on a million dollars of
\ncoverage. You'll find that it cost less than $150 extra
\nper year (depending on your driving record) but you'll
\nalso find the insurance companies very reluctant to sell
\nyou the coverage. You'll get a run-around! Just keep
\npressing.
\n
\nLiability coverage is that amount of money your
\ninsurance company would pay in the event that you
\ncaused injury to another person. This coverage
\nprotects your personal assets. We strongly recommend
\nthat your liability coverage be in the amount of at least
\n$300,000. In today's world of soaring medical costs, a
\nmoderate collision can cause injury in excess of
\n$100,000, which is the limit many people tend to carry.
\nIncredibly, some people carry coverage in amounts less
\nthan $100,000. Call your insurance agent. You may be
\nsurprised to learn that the cost of increasing your
\ncoverage to $300,000 is not that much. It is under the
\nliability clause of your policy that your insurance
\ncompany will also provide you with a lawyer to defend
\nagainst a claim brought by another person. This
\ndefense will be provided at the expense of the
\ninsurance company.Underinsured or uninsured motorist
\ncoverage is very important. This protects you in the
\nevent that a person who causes you injury has little or
\nno liability coverage himself. You should have coverage
\nin the same amount as your liability coverage. In other
\nwords, if your liability coverage is in the amount of
\n$300,000, then your uninsured motorist coverage
\nshould be in the amount of $300,000. You can elect to
\nhave less uninsured motorist coverage than liability
\ncoverage but this is not recommended. Again, you may
\nbe surprised at how little the additional cost is.
\n
\nIf you have uninsured or underinsured coverage in the
\namount of $300,000, and someone with $25,000 of
\ncoverage seriously injured you, their policy would pay
\nthe first $25,000 and your policy would step in to pay
\nthe next $275,000 to provide you with coverage to
\n$300,000.
\n
\nUninsured motorist coverage is a way for you and your
\nfamily to protect yourself against irresponsible drivers.
\n
\nTo Read More "Frequently Asked "Questions" >> http://www.vamedmal.com/faq.cfm
\n
\nBen Glass to Speak in NC on ERISA Reimbursement Litigation
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nMr. Glass has been invited to speak to the North
\nCarolina Academy of Trial Lawyers in April. He is a
\nfeatured speaker on the topic of ERISA Reimbursement
\nlitigation in tort cases. Mr. Glass is a nationally
\nrecognized expert in ERISA litigation. You can get a
\ncopy of the brochure by clicking on the link below.
\n
\nIf you do any ERISA litigation you will want to attend
\nthis seminar which will also feature one of the nation's
\nforemost plaintiff's ERISA attorneys, Mark Debosfsky, of
\nChicago.
\n
\nYou Can Get The Seminar Brochure Here >> http://www.vamedmal.com/library/ERISA%20NC%20Program.pdf
\n
\nDiscrimination in the Emergency Department
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nThe Center for Justice and Democracy has just released
\na brief report which highlights several studies
\ndemonstrating the disproportionate impact that
\nproposed
\ncaps and limitations on medical malpractice damages for
\nclaims against hospital emergency departments.
\n
\nOver 50% of negligent adverse events that occur in a
\nhospital will occur in the emegency department. Our
\nown practice representing people injured in hospitals
\nbears this statistic out.
\n
\nTo read the full article, click here >> http://centerjd.org/ER.pdf
\n
\nJust How Good Is Your Hospital?
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nYou spend hours and hours trying to figure out what
\nnew automobile, or dishwasher, or camera is
\nrated "BEST." Now, there is a way to check out your
\nhospital before you need it!
\n
\nClick Here to Start Checking Out Your Hospital >> http://www.healthgrades.com/
\n
\nRead This Case if You Deal With ERISA Liens!
\n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nWhen an attorney has a reasonable, good faith belief
\nthat a party's claim for reimbursement is "without
\nsubstantial merit," he or she is not personally liable to
\nthat party. Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. GMAC Ins.,
\n2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4181, 12 (D. Ariz. Mar. 15,
\n2004). In GMAC, the plan's assignee sued a claimant's
\nattorney for intentional interference of contractual
\nrights after the attorney refused to disburse settlement
\nproceeds to the assignee pursuant to a provision in the
\nplan. Id. at 3. The attorney asserted that under
\nKnudson, "ERISA does not support a cause of action to
\nenforce subrogation or reimbursement agreements," and
\nthus the assignee did not have any subrogation rights
\nunder ERISA. Id.
\n
\nIn its claim against the attorney, the assignee argued
\nthat the attorney's conduct was improper because it
\nviolated Arizona Professional Rule of Conduct E.R.
\n1.15, "which provides that a lawyer should segregate
\nand hold disputed property, and file an interpleader
\nwhere the dispute cannot be resolved amicably." The
\ncourt rejected this argument, holding that when an
\nattorney "properly inform[s] himself of the law," and
\nthat "appropriate research indicates that the third
\nparty's claim is meritless," then a "reasonable and good
\nfaith belief" that disbursal is not proper is permissible
\nunder the Arizona rule. Id. at 11-12.

Get Our iPhone App Contact Ben Now

Testimonials

View All

Ben's Library

Firm Newsletters

View All