What Car Crash Victims Should Know About Mediation

lifting mediator block off other two blocks When two sides are struggling to come to an agreement, it is often helpful to bring in a third party who is trained to resolve similar disputes. One method for doing this is called mediation, and it may help you resolve your dispute with the insurance company about compensation for a car crash.

There are several things you should know about mediation, including when you may be able to use it and the process involved. If you are having a dispute with the insurance company about damages for your car crash injuries, give Schmidt Kramer a call today to learn how we may be able to assist you.

There are no upfront fees and we do not get paid unless we win your case.

Can You Initiate Mediation?

You can ask the insurance company to participate in mediation to resolve the situation, but they must agree to it. However, if your lawyer files a lawsuit, the court may require both sides to attend mediation before a trial can begin.

There are pros and cons to mediation, just as there are pros and cons to filing a lawsuit and going to court. It is important to discuss the situation in detail with a licensed Harrisburg auto accident attorney who has a successful track record negotiating car insurance claims.

The Mediation Process

If both sides agree to mediation, or mediation is ordered by the court, a date will be set, and you and your attorney can start preparing. The mediator is typically someone with experience in legal disputes, such as a lawyer or insurance claims adjuster. Regardless of the mediator’s background, he or she is supposed to be unbiased.

Mediation begins with the mediator reviewing the limits of this form of dispute resolution. For example, nothing either side says can be admitted into court. That way both sides feel free to discuss the situation without concern about how it may be used against them later.

Both sides will also review the rules of the process and sign a document stating they have been informed of the rules.

The next step is for the one filing the claim to explain their view of the case – what happened, why the other party is at fault, etc. You can have your lawyer do this, as he or she has experience resolving cases and knows how to present a strong argument.

After the plaintiff’s side presents its view of the case, the other side is given a chance to explain its perspective on the case. For example, the insurance company may explain why it has denied your claim or why it is worth less than you are claiming.

Once both sides present their view of the case, there may be back-and-forth discussion, or the mediator may separate both sides and speak to them one-on-one. The mediator will likely be looking for some give and take from both sides to try to come up with a settlement both sides can agree on. It is the mediator’s job to figure out the barriers to a resolution and try to break those down.

Should You Use Mediation?

It is important to note mediators do not have the authority to enforce an agreement. Mediators do not have the authority to force the insurance company to agree to your demands, or vice versa.

That means you should not go through with mediation unless you have good reason to believe the other side wants to resolve the claim. If the insurance company does not want to resolve the claim, the whole exercise may be a waste of time.

That is why you should strongly consider finding an experienced attorney to discuss your claim with. The experienced lawyers at Schmidt Kramer know how to determine when alternative dispute resolution, such as arbitration or mediation, may be a viable option. Our goal is to get you the maximum compensation as quickly and efficiently as possible.

One of the advantages of mediation is you are not leaving the case in the hands of a jury. However, sometimes juries may be very sympathetic to your case.

Call Today with Your Legal Questions

At Schmidt Kramer, we do not charge our clients upfront fees. There are no fees to discuss your potential case and no fees while working on your case. We do not get paid until the end of the legal process, provided we win your case.

There is no risk in giving us a call to discuss your situation and find out what we may be able to do for you. Our experienced attorneys have helped many car crash victims obtain compensation.

Schmidt Kramer. Millions Recovered. Call (717) 727-1403.

Free Case Review

No Upfront Fees

Free Case Review

No Upfront Fees

Recent Results

$10,043,952.13 Personal Injury
Schmidt Kramer, P.C.partner Gerard C. Kramer won a personal injury action for $10,043,952.13 in Northumberland County on behalf of a volunteer firefighter who was the victim of Intentional Tort. The 50-year-old volunteer firefighter was seriously injured when a barn collapsed, causing a spinal injury which left him a paraplegic. The claim was brought against the arsonist who intentionally started the fire. It is believed that the verdict is the highest ever in Northumberland County.
View Results
$4,034,000.00 Personal Injury
Yesterday a Judge in Union County (Lewisburg, PA) awarded a couple from New Berlin, Pennsylvania, over $4,000,000 because the husband was shot while turkey hunting.You might ask yourself, how does a turkey hunting accident end up with that type of verdict? In order to understand the verdict you would have to know our clients. They are good people who had their life wrecked. Plus, you would have to know the defendant, who should not have been hunting with a gun because he was prohibited after a previous criminal conviction.It is a good verdict, because the Judge was able to do two things with his decision. First, he communicated to two very good people that their losses were something that those of us on the outside could appreciate and value. Mike Hobbins (our client) is a 51 year old guy who lost his sight because a convicted felon --who should not have even possessed a gun-- went hunting illegally, and broke with impunity the most fundamental rule in hunting: identify your target before you pull the trigger. The Judge accepted the financial loss Mr. Hobbins' suffered, but listened closely to the evidence of less tangible losses. When Mike broke down on the stand, because his daughter would end up walking him down the aisle at her wedding, as opposed to how it was supposed to go, the Judge was listening. When Mike could not keep it together, because of how emasculating it was for him not to be able to provide financially for his family, the Judge was listening. It was facts like these that the Judge cited to support the $2,000,000 award for non-economic damages. Second, the Judge wanted to send a message. Union County is a hunting county. Many of the residents hunt there, and people from outside the area come to Union County to hunt. It was my impression, from the Judge's statements as he rendered his decision, that he wanted to send a message to the people in Union County to protect them in their sport. The rules in place to restrict people convicted of crimes not to have a gun are not to be broken. Hunting is serious and you have to identify your target before you shoot. When you turn your back on the rules that are set to provide safety in a sport, you risk being an example. Here, the $1,000,000 punitive damage award sends that message loud and clear.When it really comes down to brass tacks, the right action was taken against a Defendant who may never truly appreciate what kind of impact his reckless choices caused.At Schmidt Kramer, we are injury lawyers. That means we work with people who were hurt in car accidents, who were hurt by the neglect of nursing homes, or those that were seriously injured because of the reckless, thoughtless acts of others. If you or a loved one have been injured in Pennsylvania, we may be able to help. While the verdict yesterday is not one that is representative of every case we do, it does show that serious and dedicated representation can bring good results.Joe ChapmanJanuary 18, 2013
View Results
$2,200,000.00 Auto Accidents
On Monday, January 6, 2014, Schmidt Kramer accident lawyer Scott Cooper obtained a verdict on behalf of his client who is the widow of a man who died in a fiery crash on Interstate 78 in Lebanon County. The awarded verdict of $2.2 million was in a nonjury proceeding before a federal judge in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. That verdict includes $100,000 in punitive damages assessed against the owner of the trucking company.Kamilah Claxton won summary judgment in November after the defendants, Sukhwinder Singh and the trucking company for which he worked, failed to file a brief in opposition to Claxton's motion, which was made in September. The verdict in Claxton v. Singh was issued after the court held a non-jury assessment of damages earlier this month."Mr. Sukhchan Singh, the employer, is liable on the basis of respondent superior, but was also grossly negligent in failing to maintain his vehicle in compliance with state and federal law, particularly with regard to having required safety inspections and correcting defects in its braking equipment," said U.S. District Judge William W. Caldwell of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in his opinion accompanying the verdict."He was also grossly negligent in entrusting his vehicle to Sukhwinder Singh, an inexperienced truck driver who had failed the written test and driving test multiple times before finally earning his commercial driving license," Caldwell said.
View Results
$1,200,000.00 Personal Injury
A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.2012-06-26 10:00:00 AMDate of Verdict: June 19. 2012Court and Case No.: C.P. Dauphin County No. 2009-CV-14003-MMJudge: Scott EvansType of Action: Medical malpracticeInjuries: Anoxic brain injuryPlaintiffs Counsel: Terry S. Hyman, Schmidt Kramer, HarrisburgPlaintiffs Experts: Dr. Anna H. Messner, liability; Lucille Packer, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Palo Alto, Calif.; Terry P. Leslie, vocations and earning capacity, Lancaster; Dr. Hilary B. Berlin, pediatric psychiatry, Great Neck, N.Y.Defense Counsel: Andrew H. Foulkrod, Darlene K. King, Foulkrod Ellis, Camp Hill, PADefense Experts: James C. Reilly, Pediatric Otolaryngology, Wilmington, DEComment: A Dauphin County jury has awarded a $1.2 million verdict to the parents of a 5-year-old who had an anoxic brain injury and stopped breathing after he had a tonsillectomy.The entire verdict came against Dr. Andrew M. Shapiro, the doctor who plaintiffs Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Metz alleged chose to have the boy monitored at a pediatric ward. The plaintiffs argued Shapiro failed to tell nurses caring for the baby about, and how to care for, the boy's enhanced risk for respiratory failure.The jury came back on June 19 and awarded Reginald Graham and Tykeisha Mets $500,000 in non-economic damages and $686,170 in loss of future earning capacity, according to the plaintiffs counsel.According to the statement, the baby's mother brought him to Shapiro because she was "'afraid that he might stop breathing during his sleep,'" the plaintiffs' pretrial statement said. Shapiro performed a sleep study and observed the baby's Apnea Hypopnea Index to be 43 — four times higher than what's considered severe. A tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy were performed.According to the plaintiffs, the baby's sleep study results put him at an increased risk for post-operative respiratory complications. Despite this, they argued in the statement, Shapiro ordered the pediatric nurses at the Harrisburg Hospital general pediatric ward to observe the boy as they would any other patients — about once every four hours.The pretrial statement said that one in four children who have an AHI in the 40s and oxygen desaturation below 80 have some type of respiratory problem. The younger the child, the greater the risk of a respiratory problem, the statement said.According to the statement, Shapiro took off the child's pulse oximeter, the finger-mounted device used to measure blood oxygen, and ordered a heart and respiratory rate monitor. The child was 11 months old at the time.The plaintiffs pled that the baby was last seen at 4 a.m. There was no record of his oxygen saturation for the next hour and 45 minutes. He stopped breathing a 6:40 a.m., and his brain was without oxygen long enough to cause demonstrable injury on an MRI."Immediately prior to his surgery, [the child] was a normal child, who could say mama, eat finger foods, and was just on the verge of walking," the statement said. "After his code, [he] was like a newborn. He could not lift his head or sit up. He could not talk. He could not move."In his pretrial statement, Shapiro argued that he recognized the child's pre-operative sleep study showed he was driven to breath by decreased blood oxygen saturation, which he said was typical in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.He argued the American Academy of Otolaryngology dictates that admission to the intensive care unit is not the standard of care. In the statement, he said nurses did not observe signs of respiratory distress. No alarms sounded until the child arrested, the statement said.He said the baby likely arrested as a result of hypoglycemia and/or an acute aspiration, which he argued would not have been identified by blood oxygen saturation.— Ben Present, of the Law Weekly
View Results
$1,024,040.80 Auto Accidents
Scott Cooper settled a wrongful death case on behalf of the widow of a police office who was killed in a car accident in the line of duty for $1,024,040.80. The claim against the other driver was amicably resolved before suit was filed for the entire available policy limits for the other driver. The case took place in Adams County, PA.
View Results

Testimonials

The legal team was very professional and met my needs I would highly recommend them
Monte cargile
Very great experience working with you guys continue the great service timely response communication well understand
jackie duffus
Schmidt Kramer is simply definition of hardworking, they are trustworthy and get best claim you could never think of.
After being in an automobile accident , Scott Cooper came highly recommended to me. I found Scott and his team very kind and considerate. Scott took time to explain the whole process to me and got me a settlement in a timely manner. I couldn't ask for best representation.
Ruthie Lupfer
Great Experience and Great results.. I recommend!!
Aaron Marquis

When is Mediation Used to Resolve a Car Insurance Claim?

Can You Initiate Mediation?

The Mediation Process

Should You Use Mediation?

Call Today with Your Legal Questions