What Is The Ga Law For Disbursement Of Injury Settlements? Does The Lawyer's Percentage Come Out Of The Total?

[Dunne]

Does the lawyer's percentage come out of the total amount, or after realized charges are paid(out of pocket medical bills, lost wages, etc)? If there were a hypothetical settlement for $10k, but there were $3k medical and $2k lost wages, would the lawyer get it from $10k or $5k?

[Raimundo]

Disbursement of Settlement This is a question only your lawyer can answer. It depends on what he negotiated. Sources: https://www.lawguru.com/cgi/bbs/message.php?i=246180875&view=a newbie2268986 56 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Buach]

You can probably find someone who can do it by the hour or perhaps negotiate the lien down for a.... Personal Injury Law(Accidents/Slip & Fall) - Primax wants big chunk of settlementExpert: Edward A. Smith - 8/5/2006QuestionHi Ed,Thanks for helping me out in the past with my auto accident claim(in California). I settled with the drunk driver's insurance(Allstate) for $15K(the limit), my UIM claim has been settled for $35K(policy limit) and now Primax recoveries, a collection agency for my HMO Great-West(through my job), wants just over $15K for medical bills from me. They say if I don't contact them they'll refer this to their legal dept. I am currently on state disability and obviously do not want to give them any of my settlement. Any helpful advice would be appreciated.Thanks,Scott AnswerScott, on second thought..you really need to followup with a very good personal injury attorney in Los Angeles and hire him to take care of this or negotiate it for you. You can probably find someone who can do it by the hour or perhaps negotiate the lien down for a flat fee.Here's a letter by a friend in Georgia who is dealing with this situation. The letter would need to be modified to fit your circumstances and to fit California Law(Similar to Ga law in many respects).Last month the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that initially appeared to be catastrophic for injury victims whose employee health benefit plans had paid medical expenses.In http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=05-260>Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc., 126 S.Ct. 1869(U.S.,2006), ChiefJustice Roberts wrote for the court that an ERISA benefit plan could sue in federal court for reimbursement of medical benefit it had paid after the injury victim recovers from the party responsible for the injury.Those of us who deal with these cases every day recognize how devastating the net effect of that can be, taking away much if not all of the victim's recovery after payment of the fees and expenses involved in holding the opposite party accountable.However, upon further examination, there are still viable defenses against most if not all such reimbursement claims. For example, if the benefit plan is insured, the insurance company's portion of the claim for reimbursement is still subject to state laws regulating insurance, which in Georgiaincludes a statutory "full compensation" rule. As the benefit plan's claim arises in equity, a full range of equitable defenses may be asserted. While it may be necessary to negotiate compromises on more ERISA eimbursement claims than in recent years, it will still serve the injury victim's interests for their lawyers to stake out a well-informed hard line defense against such claims. Following is a sample of a letter to the subrogation agent of an insured ERISA plan that may be adapted in individual circumstances.This firm represents > in the above-referenced matter with regard to serious bodily injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision on >. You have asserted on behalf of > a claim for subrogation or reimbursement of medical benefits paid to the medical providers treating > as a result of this injury.As you know, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974(ERISA) preempts all state laws â??insofar as they . . . relate to any employee benefit plan,â??29 U.S.C. § 1144(a), but saves from preemption state â??law[s] ... which regulat[e] insurance ...·,â??§ 1144(b)(2)(A). The United States Supreme Court held, in the case of FMC Corp. v. Holliday, 498 U.S. 52(1990), that employee benefit plans that are insured are subject to indirect state regulation, as an insurance company that insures a plan remains an insurer for purposes of state laws â??purporting to regulate insuranceâ?? after application of the preemption clause, savings clause anddeemer clause of the ERISA statute.Therefore, an ERISA plan is bound by state insurance laws insofar as they apply to the planâ??s insurer. To save state law from preemption, ERISA's savings clause does not require that state law regulate "insurance companies" or even "the business of insurance"; it need only be a "law ... which regulates insurance." Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, § 514(b)(2)(A), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1144(b)(2)(A).You are undoubtedly familiar with the recent case of Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc., 126 S.Ct. 1869(U.S.,2006). In Sereboff, the Solicitor General of the United States filed an amicus curie brief on the side of the ERISA plan, citing FMC v. Holliday and stating: â??State lawslimiting reimbursement may of course apply to insured ERISA plans if those state laws are directed to insurance.â?? Sources: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Personal-Injury-Law-928/Primax-wants-big-chunk.htm bacardi 56 months ago Please sign in to give a compliment. Please verify your account to give a compliment. Please sign in to send a message. Please verify your account to send a message.

[Howahkan]

This is a question only your lawyer can answer. It depends on what he negotiated.

[Madelhari]

Personal Injury Law(Accidents/Slip & Fall) - Primax wants big chunk of settlementExpert: Edward A. Smith - 8/5/2006QuestionHi Ed,Thanks for helping me out in the past with my auto accident claim(in California). I settled with the drunk driver's insurance(Allstate) for $15K(the limit), my UIM claim has been settled for $35K(policy limit) and now Primax recoveries, a collection agency for my HMO Great-West(through my job), wants just over $15K for medical bills from me. They say if I don't contact them they'll refer this to their legal dept. I am currently on state disability and obviously do not want to give them any of my settlement. Any helpful advice would be appreciated.Thanks,Scott AnswerScott, on second thought..you really need to followup with a very good personal injury attorney in Los Angeles and hire him to take care of this or negotiate it for you. You can probably find someone who can do it by the hour or perhaps negotiate the lien down for a flat fee.Here's a letter by a friend in Georgia who is dealing with this situation. The letter would need to be modified to fit your circumstances and to fit California Law(Similar to Ga law in many respects).Last month the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that initially appeared to be catastrophic for injury victims whose employee health benefit plans had paid medical expenses.In http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=05-260>Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc., 126 S.Ct. 1869(U.S.,2006), ChiefJustice Roberts wrote for the court that an ERISA benefit plan could sue in federal court for reimbursement of medical benefit it had paid after the injury victim recovers from the party responsible for the injury.Those of us who deal with these cases every day recognize how devastating the net effect of that can be, taking away much if not all of the victim's recovery after payment of the fees and expenses involved in holding the opposite party accountable.However, upon further examination, there are still viable defenses against most if not all such reimbursement claims. For example, if the benefit plan is insured, the insurance company's portion of the claim for reimbursement is still subject to state laws regulating insurance, which in Georgiaincludes a statutory "full compensation" rule. As the benefit plan's claim arises in equity, a full range of equitable defenses may be asserted. While it may be necessary to negotiate compromises on more ERISA eimbursement claims than in recent years, it will still serve the injury victim's interests for their lawyers to stake out a well-informed hard line defense against such claims. Following is a sample of a letter to the subrogation agent of an insured ERISA plan that may be adapted in individual circumstances.This firm represents > in the above-referenced matter with regard to serious bodily injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision on >. You have asserted on behalf of > a claim for subrogation or reimbursement of medical benefits paid to the medical providers treating > as a result of this injury.As you know, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974(ERISA) preempts all state laws â??insofar as they . . . relate to any employee benefit plan,â??29 U.S.C. § 1144(a), but saves from preemption state â??law[s] ... which regulat[e] insurance ...·,â??§ 1144(b)(2)(A). The United States Supreme Court held, in the case of FMC Corp. v. Holliday, 498 U.S. 52(1990), that employee benefit plans that are insured are subject to indirect state regulation, as an insurance company that insures a plan remains an insurer for purposes of state laws â??purporting to regulate insuranceâ?? after application of the preemption clause, savings clause anddeemer clause of the ERISA statute.Therefore, an ERISA plan is bound by state insurance laws insofar as they apply to the planâ??s insurer. To save state law from preemption, ERISA's savings clause does not require that state law regulate "insurance companies" or even "the business of insurance"; it need only be a "law ... which regulates insurance." Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, § 514(b)(2)(A), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1144(b)(2)(A).You are undoubtedly familiar with the recent case of Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc., 126 S.Ct. 1869(U.S.,2006). In Sereboff, the Solicitor General of the United States filed an amicus curie brief on the side of the ERISA plan, citing FMC v. Holliday and stating: â??State lawslimiting reimbursement may of course apply to insured ERISA plans if those state laws are directed to insurance.â??