On March 21, 2011 the Colorado Supreme Court announced the case of Constable v. Northglenn, LLC., 09SC1063. Ms. Constable ran a small flower shop in a shopping center located in Northglenn. In the winter of 2009 a patron of the shopping complex slipped and fell in the parking lot suffering injury. This patron brought a claim against Northglenn for negligently maintaining the parking lot under the premise liability act. After being sued Northglenn brought a claim against Constable seeking indemnification for any damages paid to the injured women pursuant to the lease agreement the parties had signed. Constable filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in the trial court arguing that Northglenn had exclusive control of the parking lot and that they had a nondelegable duty as the property owner concerning premise liability claims. The trial court agreed with Constable and granted the Motion for Summary Judgment. However, on appeal the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed the trial court concluding that the indemnity provision in the lease was not against public policy and it clearly stated that Constable agreed to indemnify Northglenn for injuries sustained on the property even if they occurred in a location under the exclusive control of Northglenn and as a result of Northglenn’s negligence.
Constable appealed to the Supreme Court and they concluded that the subject language was not ambiguous and that Constable agreed to indemnify Northglenn for injuries on the property including injuries resulting from Northglenn’s own negligence. They further held that the subject language did not violate public policy concerning a property owner’s nondelegable duty concerning premise liability claims as they still owed a duty to the injured party. They were simply allowed by contract to seek reimbursement from Constable.
Historically the courts did not enforce such agreements against individuals with limited bargaining power. Constable was a sole proprietor operating a small flower shop. The lesson here is watch what you sign and make sure you understand the risk you are getting into. In this case Constable had no control over the parking lot and Northglenn was the entity that was at fault for the subject injury. Despite these facts Constable agreed to pay for the harm done in her lease agreement even if Northglenn was the responsible party.
It makes sense to speak with an attorney before signing any contract. If you are the victim of someones negligence please contact the law office of Sisun & Scriven, P.C.
As the warm weather approaches many of us will clean off those bikes that have been stored away during the winter to enjoy the beautiful days that Colorado offers. However, most people living in this state do not know that it is illegal to ride your bikes on the sidewalk in the City and County of Denver and many injury accidents occur in Denver as a result of drivers not anticipating bicyclist on the sidewalk. Often these accidents result in serious injuries to the bike rider and large medical expenses. It is after this terrible event that the bike rider learns that they were not supposed to be on the sidewalk, that the investigating police officer is citing them with a violation and the driver’s insurance is denying any fault and refusing to pay for any medical expenses or other compensation.
Here at Sisun & Scriven, P.C. we would like for people living in this great state to be able to enjoy the soon approaching nice weather and remain safe. As a consequence we suggest that you follow a few helpful tips. First, always ride in designated bike lanes and if there are no bike lanes travel with traffic in the street. Second, follow all applicable traffic laws just as you were operating a motor vehicle. Finally, make sure before you enter an intersection where you can be struck by a car make eye contact with the driver to insure they know you are present.
If you are the unfortunate victim of an automobile/bicycle accident please call the lawyers at Sisun & Scriven, P.C. for a free consultation concerning your legal rights.
March 17, 2011 is St. Patrick’s Day which can be one of the funniest days of the year. However, please be careful this holiday and don’t drink and drive. In 2004 pursuant to the Rocky Mountain News the average cost in Denver, Colorado for a DUI conviction was $8,866.00. That figure does not include the increased insurance rates and possible civil liability if you cause injury when you are out driving under the influence. The average cost for a 4.4 mile taxi cab ride in Denver is $18.88 including a 15% tip. Financially it just makes sense not to get behind the wheel if you are going to be drinking on St. Patrick’s Day.
Enjoy celebrating this Thursday but do it responsibly and remember if you or a family member have been injured as a result of someone else’s negligence contact the law firm of Sisun & Scriven, P.C.
In 2008 the Colorado Legislature made it mandatory for automobile insurance carriers to offer at least $5,000.00 in medical payments coverage to all policy holders. Our firm recommends that if you have previously rejected this coverage that you revise your policy and add at least the $5,000.00 minimum. While, your agent may tell you that this will increase your premium the increase is very nominal. However, the benefits are significant. You will be provided medical coverage for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident regardless of fault without any right of subrogation. Meaning that if you get a settlement you will not have to pay the insurance company back money paid for medical expenses. This would not be true if you use health insurance to pay the expenses. All your passengers are covered under the medical payments coverage which could be very beneficial especially if you are at fault for the accident. Finally, it can prevent you from incurring costly medical expenses which can cause great distress and affect your credit. Check your policy today and make sure you have medical payment coverage.
Effective January 1, 2011 it became easier for Colorado residents to collect for injuries caused by the negligence of another motorist. In years past when an injured party could not locate the negligent driver for service of a Complaint the lawsuit could not move forward because the Court would lack jurisdiction over the person who caused the accident. This was a much more common problem then you might believe. It has been our experience that people provide police officers with false identification or attempt to evade service of the Complaint to avoid liability. When the lawyer was unable to get service on the negligent driver that person’s insurance had no obligation to Answer for the negligent driver or to resolve the case even if there was a policy of insurance in place at the time of the accident. The new law makes recovery easier under these facts allowing an injury victim to file a lawsuit and make a reasonable attempt to locate and serve the negligent party. However, if he cannot be located after reasonable efforts the injured party can now make a claim on his own uninsured motorist coverage. In the past if you could not show that the negligent driver was in fact uninsured at the time of the accident you could not make an uninsured motorist claim. This simple change in the law will allow injury victims another avenue to recovery when the responsible party is nowhere to be found.
If you have any questions concerning an injury accident contact the attorneys at Sisun & Scriven, P.C.
In October 2010 two companies that lend money to injured victims as advances against their personal injury settlements filed a lawsuit against the Colorado Attorney General’s Office. The reason for the lawsuit was an opinion issued by the attorney general concluding that these lending companies were making unregulated and unlicensed loans in the state of Colorado. The attorney general determined that they were also violating the Colorado Consumer Credit Code based upon the interest rate of these loans. In response to this opinion these companies suspending loaning money in Colorado and filed the lawsuit asking the District Court to conclude that the money being advanced was not actually a loan, but rather a purchase of contingent proceeds or chooses in action. In support of this position the companies allege that the borrowing party does not have to pay the money back if the case is lost or they simply walk away from the claim. As a consequence as long as the borrowing party does not get any money the loan does not have to be paid back.
The Colorado Attorney General has filed a counterclaim in the action seeking both a preliminary and permanent injunction to prevent these companies from making or collecting on these unsupervised loans. The outcome of this litigation may greatly impact an injured party’s ability to get money prior to resolution of their case for medical expenses and daily living expenses.
We will keep you advised as this case proceeds through the Courts.
photo courtesy of Responsible Lending
Person’s injured as a result of someone else’s negligence scored a huge victory with the Colorado Supreme Court recently in the case of Volunteers of America Colorado Branch vs. Gardenswartz, No. 09SC20 (November 15, 2010). In this decision the Supreme Court considered whether a successful party may recover the full amount of the medical expenses incurred or may only recover the discounted amount paid by a third-party insurance company. After considering all the issues the Supreme Court concluded that the prevailing party is entitle to recover the full amount of the billed medical expenses despite the fact that a lesser amount was actually paid for these expenses. The court reasoned that a negligent party should not benefit from the fact that an injured party had insurance and should be responsible for the reasonable value of all bills regardless of the amount paid.
The practical affect of this decision is that injured parties are going to net more money for their injuries because they will be compensated an amount which is higher than what was actually paid for expenses. In the past some injured parties would receive very little in compensation as a large amount of the money would go to medical expenses and the settlements would only account for the amount paid in medical expenses not the amount incurred. Typically the amount billed is much larger than the amount which is actually paid pursuant to a contracted rate with the health insurance company. Therefore, we are very optimistic that 2011 should be a better year for injury victims and the amount they see in their pockets when resolving negligence cases.
Please continue to follow our blog for updates in the law and information that will help those that have been injured by others.
We have started this to help our friends and neighbors in the Denver metro area understand the law a little better. We will post occasional items of interest in regards to the law and your rights. These posts do not replace actually working with an attorney on whatever particular issues you may have. We certainly urge you to discuss any pressing issue with an attorney of your choice (hopefully us). These posts will hopefully help you however in knowing some of your rights and some of what is going on in Colorado.
The materials contained herein may not reflect the most current legal developments. Such material does not constitute legal advice, and no person should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information contained in this Web log without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice on that person’s particular circumstances. Sisun & Scriven, PC expressly disclaim all liability to any person with respect to the contents of this Web site, and with respect to any act or failure to act made in reliance on any material contained herein.
