The trial lawyers at Munro Byrd regularly help clients who injured in car wreck cases. In most of the cases our firm handles, our client is the driver, and the only occupant of the car. But sometimes a negligent driver hits several cars at once, or there are multiple people in a single car. Because a client’s recovery often depends on the various insurance coverages available, multiple injured people in the same crash adds some complexity to the claims against the same coverages. Our goal is always to maximize our client’s recovery, even when that means competing with other claims. What happens when there are multiple claimants for the same coverages?
First, what are the problems we must solve? When you see insurance coverage, you will often see a “per person” and a “per occurrence” or “per accident” limit. It may say, for instance, $100,000 / $200,000. That means that $100,000 is available per person, $200,000 per accident. What if there are three claimants? Technically, any one of them can claim up to $100,000 (based upon the value of their injuries), but three seriously injured people cannot each get $100,000 if $200,000 is the total available for the entire collision event.
The insurance company for the at-fault (negligent) driver, the “liability carrier,” is usually reluctant to settle one case for maximum value—especially if other claims have been (or could be) made by other people for the remaining coverage, and it may not be sufficient.
Paying one seriously injured claimant the maximum would leave a limited balance to the remaining occupants, and could leave the negligent driver personally responsible for the excess liability to those two people. Insurance companies will argue that they cannot settle one without some guarantee that the others will resolve for the balance. When they have information that all three people are seriously injured, even if one or two haven’t yet brought a claim, the insurance company will be reluctant to pay as much to the claimant who makes the first demand.
In those situations, liability carriers still want to settle all three personal injury claims efficiently, and for the total coverage. So, they sometimes use a Virginia procedure called Interpleader (see Va. Code § 8.01-364). That allows them to request to pay the insurance money into a court, and then have the court decide how to divide up the funds among the multiple claimants. While an interpleader may make the process easier for insurance carriers, it can certainly complicate things for several personal injury claimants who must share the money. It can also cause delays and potential problems in pursuing remaining underinsured motorist coverage.
Along with some excellent co-counsel from another firm, we recently handled an interpleader case arising from a car wreck that occurred in Rockbridge County. We represented three family members who suffered personal injuries in the car wreck as passengers, in a car driven by an at-fault driver. Complicating things, there were several other people injured in a different vehicle. Despite clear liability and straightforward damages, the liability carrier refused to settle any of our clients’ claims, even after we filed lawsuits on behalf of our clients. The liability coverage was itself not very high. Importantly, our clients did not have a conflict with each other in competing for overall insurance coverage. There was sufficient overall coverage from additional, uninsured/underinsured motorist, or “UM/UIM”, coverage to cover all the value of all three claims.
But the liability carrier didn’t want to just pay all of its coverage without some guarantee that the liable driver would not have excess liability to any one of the three. Because our clients’ claims and the claims of the other injured people exceeded the amount of the available insurance coverage for the at-fault driver, the liability carrier filed an interpleader action to try and resolve all personal injury claims arising from the car wreck.
We initially took the position that an interpleader action was an improper way for a liability carrier to resolve the case. We did so for many reasons, including that an interpleader may prevent our clients from pursuing additional, uninsured/underinsured motorist, or “UM/UIM”, coverage (see Va. Code § 38.2-2206). After extensive negotiations with our clients’ UM/UIM carrier, we achieved stipulations that allowed the interpleader action to proceed without prejudice to our clients’ ability to pursue UM/UIM coverage based upon the exhaustion of the overall liability limits. This allowed the interpleader to proceed to a trial for the specific purpose of the court distributing the funds amongst the personal injury claimants.
Just as we entered into stipulations with our clients’ UM/UIM carrier, all attorneys entered into a number of other stipulations to streamline the process and reduce the costs of litigation. This included allowing medical and billing records to be submitted to the court without any testimony from a doctor or other health care provider. To make sure that the at-fault driver didn’t have any assets beyond the insurance policy, we had the driver sign an affidavit under the penalty of perjury which established a lack of assets we could use to satisfy any judgment that may ultimately be entered in favor of our personal injury clients.
Due to the stipulations, we were able to resolve the interpleader to ensure that each claimant the opportunity to pursue full available coverage for each’s injuries, while moving our clients’ claims forward. And, we were able to do it quickly. For example, while most cases filed in circuit courts can take a year or more to get to trial, we were able to try the streamlined case within a few months of the liability carrier filing suit. In addition, while most circuit court cases take a day or more to try, we were able to put on a case involving the claims of eight different people in a few hours. Because we steered the process and presented our clients’ claims and evidence effectively, we provided the court compelling evidence to maximize the value of our clients’ particular claims, just as if we were trying them separately—and at lower cost.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the court awarded our personal injury clients all available liability coverage. We were then free to pursue our clients’ claims against the UM/UIM carrier. The liability carrier was satisfied that it had protected its own driver from excess liability claims, because the interpleader gave other claimants the opportunity to make their own claims too.
If you have been injured in a car accident or a trucking collision, it’s important that you act quickly to hire skilled attorneys who will prosecute your claim professionally and efficiently. If you need answers, please contact us. Our firm regularly handles personal injury cases and has extensive experience representing people who suffered an exacerbation of a pre-existing condition, including complex claims and procedures. We are here to help.
We cannot promise similar results in all cases, but if you have questions about a personal injury claim in Virginia, call us. We litigate such cases in Roanoke City and County, Montgomery County (Christiansburg, Blacksburg), Lynchburg, Abingdon, Martinsville, Rocky Mount, Wytheville, Bedford, Covington, Harrisonburg, Richmond, Charlottesville, Lexington, or Staunton. We practice in rural areas like Bath County, Campbell County, Giles County, Craig County, Smyth County, Alleghany County, Pulaski County, Franklin County, Campbell County, Carroll County, Patrick County, Floyd County, Stuart County, Pittsylvania County, Henry County, and Wythe County. We also litigate in Virginia federal courts, including those divisions in Roanoke, Abingdon, Danville, Harrisonburg, Charlottesville, Alexandria, and Richmond.