Washington DC Personal Injury Lawyer Blog | Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata, & Siegel P.C.

Monday, April 28, 2008

Requests to Inspect and Photographing

Requests to inspect the premises of a manufacturing facility, a location at which there was a slip and fall or any other location relevant to the lawsuit in the custody and control of the opponent is a frequently utilized discovery device. The lawyers at Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel, P.C. will frequently take their video or other cameras, and occasionally an expert, to inspect, photograph, photocopy, videotape, or otherwise record an accident scene, or the vehicle that caused the injury to our client, particularly a large truck. The use of a Request to Inspect can also be valuable when there was an injury to a person or property caused by, for example, a water leak. The lawyers at Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel, P.C. recently completed a lawsuit against the landlord relating to injuries sustained when the ceiling fell on our client’s head. The premises were subject to a Request to Inspect to determine why the ceiling fell after it had been repaired from a water leak and why the water continued to leak despite the repair. In “the group home cases”, which this law firm has received favorable recognition, we often would inspect and potentially photograph, by videotape or otherwise, the living conditions of the individuals in the group home that we represented. Requests to Inspect and Photocopy are extremely important component of the discovery of facts in a lawsuit.

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 2:45 PM

Friday, April 25, 2008

Request for Production of Documents

Request for production of documents are a second basic form of discovery exchanged between the parties at the early stages of a lawsuit. An example of a set of Request for Production of Documents for an automobile accident case is attached to this blog. Request for Production of Documents generally seek documents relating to the amount of insurance, the reports and credentials of experts, reports relating to the accident, statements taken from parties and witnesses relating to the accident and other matters relevant to the lawsuit.

/DC%20owner%20RPDs.doc

posted by Biera Campbell at 2:23 PM

Monday, April 21, 2008

Allan M. Siegel will take over as President of the Trial Lawyers Association of Washington, D.C. on May 10, 2008.

On May 10, 2008 Partner Allan M. Siegel will be inducted as the President of the Trial Lawyers Association of Washington, D.C. (“DC-TLA”) at is Annual Awards Dinner which is being held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The organization will also be honoring the American Association of Justice President, Kathleen Flynn Peterson, Retired Maryland Court of Appeals Judge Howard Chasanow, and Robert Peck of the Center for Constitutional Litigation.

DC-TLA is an organization which is dedicated to preserving the rights of, and advocating on behalf, of those who are injured by the negligence of others. Its members share an abiding commitment to maintaining a civil-justice system that enables citizens to have their claims for full and fair compensation adjudicated by a trial by jury. The organization supports the legal community by championing legislation that promotes and protects our clients’ rights and by providing high-quality educational programs for its members. Allan will have served as the Secretary, Treasurer, Vice President and President–Elect of the organization prior to his taking over as President on May 10, 2008. Allan will be the third member of Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel, P.C. to have been President of this prestigious organization, following in the footsteps of Donald Chaikin, Partner Emeritus, and Partner Ira Sherman.

posted by Biera Campbell at 10:35 AM

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Basic discovery – serving interrogatories

Interrogatories are a set of written questions presented to an opponent for them to answer, in writing, under oath. A sample set of interrogatories in an automobile accident is appended below this blog for those of you curious to see the types of questions Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel would likely present to an opponent in an automobile accident case. A sample of interrogatories sent by the opponent to Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel to be answered by our client is attached below. Interrogatories sent with a lawsuit generally require a party to provide an answer within 45 days. Interrogatories or other discovery sent after a lawsuit has been served usually permit the party only 30 days to file its responses. Interrogatories usually ask the parties questions that reveal their identity, their employment, housing and driving history, the injuries they have sustained, a history of their medical treatment and requests for a list of medical bills.
/Example%20Rogs%20to%20Pltf.doc
/Example%20Rogs%20to%20Defendant.doc

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 7:13 AM

Monday, April 14, 2008

Discovery is not just a channel on television...

After a lawsuit is filed, each party is permitted to conduct an investigation into facts the other side has which would either support their own case or provide support to the defenses asserted by the other party. This process is called “discovery”. The discovery phase of a lawsuit permits each side to obtain information, seek documents, photograph things relevant to the lawsuit, and other activities more fully described in blogs to follow.

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 6:24 AM

Friday, April 11, 2008

A new meaning of the word "motion"

We have discussed the process of how a lawsuit begins with the filing of a complaint, the service of a summons and complaint, and the response called an “Answer”. There is a general interest in knowing other components and theories relating to how a lawsuit is processed and how it proceeds.

During the course of a lawsuit, there are times when a party wants to ask the court to do something. It could be to try to force the other side to provide information or simply to extend deadlines. Any request to the court to act is called a “motion”. A motion is an application to the court for relief. When a party (a participant in a lawsuit, force instance a plaintiff or a defendant) files a motion, the other side has an opportunity to file an opposition, usually within approximately 10 days of the filing of the motion. After the court has an opportunity to evaluate the motion and the opposition, if any, the court issues an Order setting forth the decision of the court.

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 6:21 AM

Friday, April 4, 2008

A dilemma- what to do when the other driver blames the driver of the vehicle in which you were a passenger

The lawyers of Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel frequently meet with clients who come in as a family or friends all injured in the same accident. One of these individuals was the driver and the rest were passengers. All of the individuals may describe the collision in similar fashion stating, for example, that the other person went through the red light or stop sign. With the evidence presented, there does not appear to be any opportunity for there to be a dispute regarding how the collision occurred. Nevertheless, despite what appears to be clear case in favor of our clients, insurance carriers frequently communicate that their insured has a different version. Their insured, they explain, is claiming that it is our driver that is at fault for causing or contributing to the collision. The passengers are totally innocent of any wrongdoing. The passengers know the truth and do not feel that it is fair to have what they believe to be a clear case clouded by an unfair and untruthful version of the accident. Regardless, there is a risk that the jury will find that the other driver is telling the truth. The passengers must therefore make a decision. If they file a claim against their driver as well as the other driver, except in extremely rare circumstances when the jury cannot decide which one of the two drivers caused the accident, the passengers cannot lose. Accordingly, passengers are uniformly advised that when there is a conflict regarding who is at fault, it is in their best interest to file a claim against both drivers. By filing a claim against their own driver, the innocent passengers will have the opportunity to collect from whichever of the two drivers the jury finds at fault. On the other hand, if the passengers refused to make a claim against their own driver and the jury found that their driver was at fault, they would have suffered an injury but been unable to recover compensation because of a failure to file the claim against their own driver.

One additional complicating factor is that in the event that the other driver unexpectedly claims that our driver client is at fault, we must advise the passengers that they will need to obtain other counsel since we will not be able to sue our client, their driver, on their behalf.
Accordingly, when there is the unexpected allegation that the driver of our client’s vehicle was at fault, the passengers are left with the unpleasant but presumably necessary decision to sue their own driver and seek other counsel.

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 3:33 PM

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Should you give a recorded statement to an insurance carrier--It depends!

Clients are frequently asked to provide recorded statements to an insurance carrier representative shortly after an accident takes place. Any individual that becomes a client of Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel, P.C. is informed immediately not to have any contact with the insurance carrier representing the wrongdoer. The insurance carrier for the other party does not have a right to obtain a recorded statement from you. Chaikin, Sherman, Cammarata & Siegel does not recommend that a recorded statement be provided to the insurance carrier who represents an individual that may be your adversary at a later date. Think of it this way- there is no harm in denying your potential adversary the opportunity to take your statement but there may be great harm in providing that statement. For example, if an individual describes their injuries inartfully or in a lackadaisical manner, e.g. “I’m OK I guess.” Would then have a statement from you that is inaccurate because, for example, the pain has not yet begun, or worse, you are suffering from a brain injury. Nevertheless, that statement can later be used to defeat or diminish your claim for compensation. Accordingly, requests for recorded statements from the insurance carrier representing the wrongdoer or from the individual with whom you are in a collision should not be permitted.

On the other hand, you have a duty to cooperate with your own insurance company. After a collision, you should contact your agent or insurance company and report the accident as soon as practicable. Your own insurance company has the right to conduct an investigation, including obtaining a recorded statement from you regarding the circumstances of the happening of the accident. You are obligated, under your contract with your own insurance company to cooperate with them. Therefore, in the event your own insurance carrier requests a recorded statement, you must adhere to the requirements of your contract and provide that information.

by Ira Sherman

posted by Biera Campbell at 3:25 PM

PRACTICE AREAS

Previous Posts

Archives