Does Your Auto Policy Really Protect You? Important Provisions You Should Know About
Written by Thomas P. Donnelly
The law requires drivers in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and New Jersey to maintain a certain minimum level of liability coverage with regard to any automobile. That coverage serves the important function of providing a fund from which an injured person may recover for injuries caused by the negligence of the person securing the coverage known as the “insured”. Liability coverage also serves the equally important role of protecting the insured’s personal assets by providing a monetary barrier between the claims of an injured person and the personal assets of the insured
Some other provisions of an automobile policy which get far less attention, however, are also designed to protect the insured as opposed to someone injured by the insured’s negligence. Policy provisions such as “stacking”, the limited tort option (known in New Jersey as the “verbal threshold”) and uninsured/underinsured protections are critically important to the insuring relationship and may be the difference between a successful recovery and a recovery which is not enough to satisfy your own medical bills, even if you are involved in an accident caused by the negligence of someone else. “Penny wise and pound foolish” is a dangerous proposition when it comes to automobile coverage.
We recently and successfully tried a week long jury trial in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas where the predominant issue in the case was the clients’ election of the limited tort option in his auto insurance policy. By choosing the limited tort option, the client had relinquished his right to bring suit against anyone whose negligence may have caused him to be injured, unless the accident resulted in a “serious impairment of a bodily function”. In our case, the client had suffered a mild traumatic brain injury – a concussion. Unlike the majority of individuals who suffer such injuries, our client did not recover as expected, and continued to suffer mild neuropsychological deficits such as difficulty in word finding and rapid processing of information. Notwithstanding those deficits, the client was able to return to his normal occupation. Because our client had chosen the limited tort option, the tortfeasor’s insurer refused to make any offer of settlement whatsoever based on his neuropsychological deficits, offering only to satisfy the client’s lost wages. Our negotiating position on behalf of our client in settlement discussions was clearly disadvantaged since the insurance company knew there was substantial potential that the very specific and nuanced nature of the injury would be difficult for a jury to grasp, and might lead a jury to conclude the client had not suffered a “serious impairment of a bodily function”. While we were successful at trial, the matter is one which should and would have been resolved in settlement but for the election of limited tort coverage by the client. Had our client invested in full tort coverage, he would have been spared an emotionally taxing and all-consuming trial on merits and damages.
On November 17th, Patricia Collins, Esquire, a Partner with Antheil Maslow & MacMinn, LLP in Doylestown, will participate as an instructor at McCloskey Partners’ Crash Course - HR BOOTCAMP held from 9:00 AM – 3:00 PM at Stay Bridge Suites in Montgomeryville. The program covers areas including: FLSA requirements, recruiting and hiring, managing within the law, the importance of the HR audit, documenting, disciplining, delegating and termination of employees, Workers Compensation, the importance of the HR Audit, communication / conflict resolution, benefits basics, social media policies, and many other important topics for employers.
Heather McCloskey will moderate this training event designed specifically for small-to-medium sized companies. In attendance will be business owners, professionals who handle HR as one of their varied responsibilities, entry-level HR employees and managers that in addition to their other tasks handle HR as well.
Participants may register by contacting denise@mccloskeypartners.com or 215-716-3035 x 700.
Breaking News – New One Year Separation Requirement Under the Divorce Code
Written by Elizabeth J. Fineman
On October 4, 2016, Governor Wolf signed into law new legislation that will change the separation requirement from a two year waiting period to one year. The law goes into effect on December 3, 2016. Under current law, the Divorce Code provides that in cases where only one party desires a divorce, that party must wait two years from the date of separation before they can move the matter forward. At that two year mark, the party who is seeking the divorce can move the matter forward without the non-consenting party’s agreement. The longer waiting period has often led to cases dragging on for too much time, which can lead to more animosity between the parties. For children involved in the separation, this has often had a negative impact. As a result of the passage of this new law, the hope is that cases will resolve much more quickly.
It should be noted, however, that at the one year mark from the date of separation, the case is not resolved, but rather at that time the case is permitted to proceed. It is by no means a guarantee that the process will not be lengthy from that point forward.
Stay tuned for updates as we see how the law is applied by the courts.
Patty Collins was joined by Cindy Bergvall, CPA at a seminar for local non-profit and for profit employers regarding new Department of Labor overtime regulations slated to take effect December 1st.
Most family law matters are resolved by agreement or through the court system. However, there are also alternative options, referred to as alternative dispute resolution, to settlement or court. Arbitration is one such option. If the parties agree to arbitrate their case, or a part of their case, they retain an arbitrator who they pay to hear and decide their case. The parties will still reach retain their own attorneys as the arbitrator acts as the decision maker and does not provide the parties with legal advice and guidance. The arbitrator is often an experienced family law attorney.
The parties’ sign an agreement with the arbitrator and through this agree that they will be bound by the arbitrator’s decision. The parties can determine if the arbitrator will decide all aspects of their case (such as equitable distribution, alimony and attorney’s fees) or more limited (such as division of personal property). The arbitrator is often involved in preliminary matters such as setting deadlines for discovery and a timeline for the arbitration process. Prior to the arbitration the parties, through their attorneys, provided detailed briefs to the arbitrator along with all of the documents that they want the arbitrator to consider. The arbitrator reviews everything in advance of the arbitration. At the arbitration the arbitrator has the opportunity to ask questions of the attorneys, parties and experts (if any) so that the arbitrator has all information to make a decision. The arbitrator, following the conclusion of the arbitration, issues a written decision which is often then entered by stipulation as an order of court.
Alimony is support payments made from one spouse to the other spouse after the entry of the Divorce Decree. If an award of alimony is to be entered, it must be entered prior to the Divorce Decree being signed by the Judge. Therefore, one party usually raises a claim for alimony when they file or answer the Divorce Complaint.
In determining if an award of alimony is appropriate, as well as the length of the award and the monthly amount, the court considers a list of factors which are in the Divorce Code. The factors are as follows:
• The relative earnings and earning capacities of the parties.
• The ages and the physical, mental and emotional conditions of the parties.
• The sources of income of both parties, including, but not limited to, medical, retirement, insurance or other benefits.
• The expectancies and inheritances of the parties.
• The duration of the marriage.
• The contribution by one party to the education, training or increased earning power of the other party.
• The extent to which the earning power, expenses or financial obligations of a party will be affected by reason of serving as the custodian of a minor child.
• The standard of living of the parties established during the marriage.
• The relative education of the parties and the time necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the party seeking alimony to find appropriate employment.
• The relative assets and liabilities of the parties.
• The property brought to the marriage by either party.
• The contribution of a spouse as homemaker.
• The marital misconduct of either of the parties during the marriage. The marital misconduct of either of the parties from the date of final separation shall not be considered by the court in its determinations relative to alimony, except that the court shall consider the abuse of one party by the other party.
• Whether the party seeking alimony lacks sufficient property, including, but not limited to, property distributed under Chapter 35 (relating to property rights), to provide for the party's reasonable needs.
• Whether the party seeking alimony is incapable of self-support through appropriate employment.
While the court must consider all factors, it can weigh each factor differently. Alimony is intended as a secondary remedy if, in the court’s opinion, an equitable resolution cannot be reached through equitable distribution alone. If alimony is awarded, the court will determine how many years the alimony will be paid and the monthly alimony amount. Alimony is taxable to the recipient and tax deductible to the payor. This is because alimony is treated as an income stream to the recipient.
Jessica Pritchard & Lisa Gaier at the CBCC Red Ball Gala.
Jessica Pritchard and her husband, Mark, enjoyed a lovely evening at the CB Chamber of Commerce Red Ball Gala.
Ending a marriage is one of the most difficult things a person will experience. Decisions made during the divorce process can have long ranging consequences both emotionally and financially. Several complex issues must be evaluated and resolved, including child custody, support, and equitable distribution of marital property. It is important to remember that equitable does not mean equal and that is why it is important to consult a family law attorney before making any decisions. Our family law attorneys have the knowledge, understanding, and litigation experience to help you achieve the best possible outcome based upon the specific facts of your case. Many times this means amicably resolving the marital issues through a Marital Settlement Agreement. The Marital Settlement Agreement must address all potential issues that could arise as a result of the divorce process. For example, it should include specific details on the equitable distribution of marital property, such as distribution amounts from retirement accounts or whether one spouse will keep the marital home. Other issues that may be resolved using a Marital Settlement Agreement include alimony, attorney’s fees, costs and expenses, and how to handle marital liabilities such as car loans and credit card debt. A Marital Settlement Agreement can help avoid the expense of divorce litigation and our family law attorneys routinely negotiate “real-world” and equitable settlements. However, if litigation cannot be avoided, you can be assured that we are strong advocates who will work vigorously to protect your interests.
Patty Collins, a Partner with Antheil, Maslow & MacMinn, will be joined by Cindy Bergvall, CPA, of Bee, Bergvall & Co. for a panel discussion on new Department of Labor overtime regulations and their impact on employers. This informative breakfast seminar is hosted by The Catalyst Center for Nonprofit Management on October 7th at Aldie Mansion in Doylestown. There is no charge for this event, but registration is required.
These new regulations will require action from almost every for-profit and not-for-profit organization with employees earning less than $47, 476 per year. Participants will learn about the changes in the law and what organizations will need to do when the law goes into effect on December 1, 2016.