I was working on a job site and I fell 40 feet and I broke some bones... I was deciding whether I wanted to sue or not, and when my boss didn't pick up the tab, I decided to call an attorney. I called Mike and he got me my check. He's very firm in his decision making. He handles his business. Dealing with this law firm has made me pretty happy. I'm glad that I chose Mike Grossman. If I hadn't decided to sue and went with Mike, I probably wouldn't have gotten anything. 
-
T. Young
Workplace Accident Case
Dallas Personal Injury Lawyer
Considering Representing Yourself in a Lawsuit? You May Want to Reconsider!
If you have suffered some sort of injury due to another person’s negligence or carelessness, you may wish to seek compensation and justice through a personal injury lawsuit. Representing yourself in a lawsuit is no easy task, and it requires an experienced legal professional to ensure that you receive the compensation deserve.
Despite this, many people feel that they can successfully represent themselves, and only discover too late that they are in over their head. Dallas personal injury lawyer Michael Grossman from Grossman Law Offices is here to explain to you what a strong personal injury case contains and how our firm can help you build the case you need to receive a fair settlement.
What is a Personal Injury Lawsuit and What Does it Contain?
In most situations in which a person is injured due to another person’s actions or inaction, the victim can file a personal injury lawsuit. However, a few conditions must be met first. First, a duty of care towards the victim must have been violated. A duty of care is an obligation that every person has to make sure that their actions do not put other people in danger. In some cases, this duty of care is explicit. For instance, a doctor is required to do everything he or she can for the health of his or her patients. If a doctor acts against a patient’s interests, that doctor has violated a duty of care towards his or patients.
In other cases, a duty of care is less explicit. For example, motorists are responsible for making sure that they drive responsible and do not endanger other motorists, pedestrians, or any other person. The defendant in the case must also be a proximate cause to the victim’s injuries. This essentially means that, without the defendant’s negligent actions or inactions, the victim would not have been injured. For instance, if a drunk driver crashes into a pedestrian, that driver is probably a proximate cause to the pedestrian’s injuries. That driver also violated a duty of care towards the pedestrian by driving while intoxicated. Therefore, liability is established, which is one necessary element in any personal injury case.
However, there is often more than one proximate cause in a personal injury case. In the above example, the bar where the drunk driver was served alcohol could also be a proximate cause since that bar served the driver to the point of intoxication and then allowed the driver to leave in a motor vehicle. Many lawsuits involve multiple defendants in this manner, and our attorneys make sure that we thoroughly investigate every case that we take so that we can identify every liable party.
In order to have a strong personal injury case, the victim must also have suffered some sort of damages in the accident. These damages can be explicitly financial (past and future medical bills, lost wages, property damage, etc.) or more subjective damages, including pain and suffering, disfigurement, and loss of earning capacity. If a victim has not suffered some sort of damages in an accident, then he or she does not have a strong personal injury case.
Finally, a personal injury case requires a solvent defendant. A solvent defendant is a party liable for the victim’s injuries (as discussed above) that has some sort of financial resources with which to compensate the victim. These financial resources can include insurance policies, money, or expensive assets. Without a solvent defendant, a plaintiff cannot receive any compensation for his or her injuries, as the liable party would have no means with which to compensation the victim.
However, keep in mind that many people and organizations will attempt to hide their financial resources in the event that they cause an accident. These parties know that, if they are not considered solvent, they cannot be sued. It is not easy for a non-attorney to prove that a person is solvent when that person attempts to hide their resources. However, our legal professionals know every underhanded trick in the book, and we can uncover any financial resources which those responsible for your accident attempt to hide. Our attorneys have years of experience investigating defendants, and we can ensure that the defendants in your case cannot hide their resources. We will make sure that those responsible for your accident are held accountable, and that you are fairly compensated.
We also put forth the effort necessary to build a comprehensive demand packet and prove up damages in your case. This is a complex legal process, and when handled incorrectly, it can severely limit how much compensation you are eligible to receive. When done correctly by an aggressive attorney, however, it can ensure that the full extent of your damages is accounted for, and that you receive the largest possible settlement. The true cost of an injury is often difficult to estimate, as many injuries can cause long-term financial and personal difficulty. We make sure to take these considerations into account, and we secure expert witness testimony from doctors to prove the full extent of your injuries. We can help you secure compensation for damages that you likely did not even know existed.
But Can’t I do all This? Why Shouldn’t I Represent Myself in Court and Avoid Paying Legal Fees?
Would you perform your own surgery without surgical experience? Would you build your own house or car if you were not a carpenter or a car manufacturer? Of course not, and you should not attempt to enter the legal profession without legal experience. It is true that our firm charges legal fees, but only if we successfully secure a settlement for you – and even after legal fees, your settlement will be much larger than if you had handled your case on your own. Our firm has been investigating and litigating personal injury cases for twenty years, and we have heard of countless accident victims representing themselves in court. We have never heard of any of them being successful. Many people mistakenly assume that winning a personal injury lawsuit simply comes down to knowing the law. This could not be farther from the truth. Do you know how to respond to lists of admissions? Do you know what does into a demand packet? Do you know how to prove up all the damages associated with your case? If not, you probably do not have the experience necessary to represent yourself in court.
Consider this example: our firm was recently approached by a man who was filing a personal injury lawsuit. Essentially, he had been injured in a car accident and suffered around $75,000 in damages. The particulars of his case were strong, and we could have secured a large settlement for him if he had let us represent him. However, the man was concerned about legal fees eating into his winnings, and he was convinced that he could represent himself effectively.
After approximately three months of negotiating with insurance adjusters, he was offered a $3,000 settlement for his injuries. He contacted our firm again for advice and said he was considering hiring an attorney to represent him. Ultimately, however, he decided to continue to represent himself. He thought that he could frighten the insurance company into offering him a fair settlement if he just threatened to file a lawsuit.
However, the truth is that insurance companies are not scared of you. They know that non-attorneys simply cannot file a strong personal injury lawsuit. Their defense lawyers spend every single day fighting against accident victims. Insurance companies know that, against such professionals, a non-attorney does not stand a chance.
Ultimately, the man did file a personal injury lawsuit, representing himself. The defense attorneys on retainer at the insurance company filed a list of admissions for the man to respond to. The man did not know how to respond (and likely did not even realize that a response was necessary). The defense attorneys received no response from the man, so they filed a motion for a summary judgment of dismissal on the grounds that the man failed to respond to a list of admissions. The judge agreed to the judgment and the case was thrown out. The man walked away with nothing.
Do not let this happen to you. The court does not care that you are a non-attorney, and you will be held to same standard as an experienced lawyer if you try to represent yourself in court. Let the experienced legal professionals at Grossman Law Offices help you seek compensation. We have twenty years of experience handling all kinds of personal injury cases, and we simply want to help victims receive the compensation they deserve. We have filed successful lawsuits against every major insurance company in the country. Their adjusters know who we are, and we can frighten them into offering you a fair settlement. In many cases, we secure our clients a sizable settlement without even taking a case to court simply because of our extensive track record. So if you have been hurt in an accident, let our attorneys bring those responsible for your injuries to justice. Contact Dallas personal injury lawyer Michael Grossman today, and let Grossman Law Offices help you receive the compensation you deserve.
Being Your Own Attorney is a Bad Idea
The Foundations of a Successful Lawsuit
Am I able to sue in my personal injury case?
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue injuries in an automobile accident.
$65,000.00
$26,000.00
$1,500.00
Recovery for client who suffered contusions and a soft tissue knee injury in a slip and fall.
$50,500.00
$19,102.00
$265.00
Our attorneys sued an apartment complex in relation to a brain injury sustained by a toddler when he fell through a balcony railing. The apartment complex denied liability, asserted that their railings were in spec at the time of the building's construction (some 20 years prior), and they claimed that the child's mother was contributorily negligent in that she did not notice that her child was playing near the railing.
Through litigation, our attorneys countered the defendant's arguments by showing that the case law does not support the notion of any safety related concerns in the building code being "grandfathered" in. On the contrary, a property owner has an obligation to keep safety features such as balcony railings within the specs at all times. The railings in this complex were spaced at 7 inch intervals, which was at odds with the now-standard 4 inch interval.
Additionally, our attorneys countered the claims of contributory negligence as a practical matter in that the mother was indeed monitoring the child's activity and the child literally ran up to the railing and immediately fell through the rails. Alternatively, we argued that the doctrine of parental immunity applied and that the contributory negligence, if any such negligence ever even occurred, of the mother would not be admissible. The case was satisfactorily resolved through litigation.
$350,000.00
$115,500.00
$5,000.00
Recovery for client who suffered soft tissue neck injuries in a relatively minor car accident.
$41,500.00
$16,600.00
$918.00
Recovery for worker who suffered soft tissue injuries when his fork lift was struck by a delivery truck.
$75,000.00
$25,000.00
$350.00
(policy limits) Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue back and neck injuries in a motor-vehicle accident.
$70,000.00
$23,333.00
$656.00
Our firm was hired by a delivery driver who suffered a closed head injury resulting in the permanent loss of smell in a head-on accident. The incident occurred as the driver of an 18-wheeler lost control of his vehicle and veered into oncoming traffic. Our client's delivery vehicle was struck head-on, causing massive damage to both vehicles.
Our client was taken to an area hospital where he was treated for minor bodily injuries and a closed head injury which originally manifested itself as a concussion and temporary memory loss.
Suit was filed against the defendants following their failure to respond to our correspondence in a timely manner and litigation began. Included in the suit were both the defendant truck driver and his employer. The results of our investigation and the physical evidence from the accident scene made it apparent that the defendants had indeed caused the accident. Defense counsel soon conceded liability
$1,450,000.00
$560,000.00
$31,410.00
Plaintiff suffered a back injury resulting in spinal fusion surgery when her car was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler. The defendants argued that the accident was unavoidable, thus denying liability. Litigation commenced and the case was satisfactorily resolved soon thereafter.
$875,000.00
$288,750.00
$2,500.00
(policy limits + secondary claim) Recovery for victim who suffered knee and back injury due to a car accident.
$48,800.00
$15,000.00
$1,188.00
A loading dock worker suffered serious including numerous facial fractures and minor brain trauma when an 18-wheeler back into him, crushing him against the loading dock. The plaintiff's employer was a subscriber to Texas Workers' Compensation coverage, thus a claim was rightly filed against the third party trucking company whom the truck driver operating the reversing 18-wheeler worked for.
The plaintiffs asserted the position that the trucking company in question was liable on the basis of respondeat superior and negligent retention. The defendants argued that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries by virtue of the plaintiff putting himself in harms way. They maintained that the plaintiff simply walked behind the reversing tractor trailer as it pushed back toward the loading dock.
It was later determined through deposition testimony that the truck driver had indeed instructed the plaintiff to stand behind the trailer in order to determine the vehicle's proximity to the dock. Once this fact came to light, the defendants agreed to mediate whereby the case was satisfactorily settled.
$300,000.00
$120,000.00
$9,807.00