Sentences with phrase «end collision case»

We would be pleased to assist you, your family member or a loved one with their rear end collision case.

Our attorneys can thoroughly investigate a rear - end collision case.

We have settled Massachusetts rear end collision cases against every insurance company doing business in Massachusetts and we have gone to trial on many as well.

The good news in rear end collision cases in Massachusetts is that the law presumes that fault rests on the rear driver.

Mr. Gueli has over 20 years of experience handling rear - end collision cases and he will work diligently to pursue maximum compensation on your behalf.

Sometimes laws of «contributory negligence», where you are held responsible for a portion of the damages, could apply in rear - end collision cases.

Not exact matches

An engine mount that breaks free and allows the engine to drop below the car in case of a head on collision, so it doesn't end up in your lap.

The Attention Assist, which can warn the driver in case of inattentiveness and drowsiness (now with a different level of sensitivity) and the Collision Prevention Assist Plus (it brakes when stationary vehicles are detected up to a speed of 50 km / h and can prevent rear - end collisions up to 40 km / h, depending on the situation) are part of the standard equipment.

If that's the case, then you won't have the benefits of a generous roadside assistance program to back you up should you get into a collision or end up stranded with your vehicle for any reason.

The tech also reduces body distortion, as well as shielding the fuel system in case of a rear - end collision.

In case of a collision, there is a sensor in the front bumper that raises the rear end of the hood to minimise the injuries caused to a pedestrian.

Eight seats of the same 25 were rated as «poor» or «red» meaning that the seat occupant has a significantly higher risk of developing a long term injury in the case of a low speed rear end collision.

In today's case (Farbatuk v. Lagrimas) the Plaintiff was rear - ended in a 2011 collision.

In this ICBC doctor personal injury case (Raun v. Suran, 2010 BCSC 793) the claimant was injured in a violent rear - end motor vehicle collision July 12, 2005.

In today's case (Davidge v. Fairholm) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2009 rear end collision.

In many car accidents fault or liability is easy to determine (for instance ICBC would be hard pressed to make a case that the driver of a car that was struck from behind in a rear - end collision did anything wrong to attract any portion of fault).

Research reveals that most cases involved a rear - end collision where one car was still moving when the other stopped or with both cars moving at the same time.

We aggressively represent our clients in car accident cases including every mechanism of injury from head on collisions, side crashes, drunk driving accidents, rear - end crashes to defective manufacture and design cases against auto manufacturers.

In today's case (Suthakar v. Humble) the Plaintiff was involved in a rear end collision in 2011.

This is not the case in rear - end collisions.

Depending on the speeds involved, the consequences of a rear - end collision can include whiplash injuries, herniation, and in serious cases, a rear - end collision can lead to fatal injuries, especially if the vehicle in the front was a mini-van with a short rear crumple zone or a particularly small vehicle.

Still, with that being said, there are many cases where a rear end collision isn't just a love tap while stuck in traffic.

For most people involved in a Florida rear - end collision, the «presumption of negligence» is a legal doctrine that comes into play only if the case becomes a lawsuit and that lawsuit makes it to the jury.

In the first case (Kasic v. Leyh) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2004 rear - end collision.

In the vast majority of cases, the issue of fault in rear end collisions is not contested; either the driver of the rear vehicle admits fault or does not seriously contest it.

In this case, a man's legs were seriously injured and others suffered physical damage as well because of a rear - end collision.

In today's case (Reilander v. Campbell) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2006 rear - end collision.

In the recent case (Alafianpour - Esfahani v. Jolliffe) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2012 rear end collision that the Defendant was responsible for.

In today's case (Smith v. Evashkevich) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2010 rear end collision that the Defendant admitted fault for.

In today's case (Cyr v. Kopp) the Plaintiff was involved in a rear end collision in 2011.

Case Overview Our client was involved in a tragic rear end collision that resulted in the loss of their 24 year old son.

In this week's case (Olson v. Yelland) the plaintiff was involved in a 2012 rear end collision.

Liability for rear - end collisions can be more straightforwardly proven than some other cases.

There were the rear - mounted gas tanks that caused numerous explosions in rear - end vehicular collisions, the cribs sides that collapsed killing numerous infants, and the tremendous number of cases of mesothelioma that resulted from asbestos exposure.

In the recent case (Jones v. McLerie) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2011 rear - end collision that the Defendant admitted fault for.

Car or truck accident cases involving rear - end collisions are complex and can prove confusing to their victims.

Rear - end collisions are a special kind of case.

In today's case (Mavi v. Booth) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2006 rear - end collision in Langley, BC.

In today's case (Deventer v. Woods) the Plaintiff was involved in 3 rear - end collisions.

Personal Injury cases involving car accidents, truck accidents, rear - end collisions, disabling work injuries and wrongful death claims.

In today's case (Dolha v. Heft) the Plaintiff was involved 2008 rear end collision.

In today's case (Gatari v. Wheeler, BCPC Victoria Registry File No. 080409) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2007 rear end collision near Duncan, BC.

Because when counsel assumes that «Hey, a motor vehicle collision case is a motor vehicle collision case» that is usually the first step what ends up being a malpractice claim against that attorney.

I just finished litigating a case with $ 2,000.00 in property damage from a rear end collision with a driver insured by USAA in Cumming, Georgia.

In today's case (Wallman v. John Doe) the Plaintiff was involved in a rear end collision in 2006.

In today's case (Guthrie v. Narayan) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2009 rear - end collision.

In today's case, (Harmati v. Williams) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2011 rear end collision that the Defendant accepted fault for.

In today's case (Beaton v. Perkes) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2012 rear end collision the Defendant admitted fault for.

Our firm represented a 51 - year - old executive and his wife in a case involving a rear - end collision involving an 18 - wheeler.

The most interesting safety features of the S80 are the front seats, which adjust backwards in cases of a rear end collision, greatly reducing the chances of neck injury.