John J. Branigan Law Offices

I have some very important information for all my clients, and future clients, in Pennsylvania who travel to New Jersey. The State of New Jersey has a law that will change the way that you select auto insurance for your vehicles registered and garaged in Pennsylvania. Simply stated, the law in New Jersey, called a Deemer Statute, states that if your insurance company is authorized to do business in New Jersey and you are involved in an accident in New Jersey you can only br...Continue reading

John J. Branigan Law Offices Yesterday I tried to type and post a message without asking my staff for help. Naturally I deleted half of the message so I am red...oing everything today with the help of Julie. It is so sad to see so many people pay auto insurance premiums for years only to find that when they are in an accident they are informed that they are "not covered" for many of their claims. I want this to be the first of a number of educational guides to the confusing terms and conditions of an automobile insurance policy. The auto law is technically called the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (PAMVFRL), 75 Pa. C.S. 1701 et seq. it requires PA drivers to insure every registered auto they own even if that motor vehicle (MV) is scrapped; if your name is still on it you must provide coverage or you will suffer consequences. The basic coverage required is: Liability: $15,000 per person/$30,000 per accident Medical: $ 5,000 Property Damage: $5,000 This is the basic coverage and naturally the cheapest. Liability covers you for accidents you cause up to $15,000 per person and up to $30,000 for injury to two or more people in any one accident. $5,000 in property damage covers damage to the other person's car. You see that this coverage benefits the other driver more than it benefits you or your family. In later comments I will discuss ways to protect your family in the same amounts as you protect others (uninsured motorist and underinsured motorist coverage). Today however I want to talk about the trap set by insurance companies to make your basic coverage even cheaper. They have designed a coverage that eliminates up to 50% of all legitimate injury claims by convincing you to limit your access to the courts when you choose the Limited Tort Option instead of the Full Tort Option. By choosing a Limited Tort policy you agree that your ability to recover for your suffering can only occur if you have a "serious impairment of a body function". The courts have interpreted this language to DENY COMPENSATION to claimants who have been unable to work for a month or more, claimants who have chronic sprains and strains but no fractures, claimants who have fractures that have healed well. These are examples from real cases decided in the Pennsylvania courts. Full Tort coverage allows a claimant to recover compensation for any injury caused by another person. Full Tort coverage allows you to work through your injury so that you may continue to provide for your family while treating with your doctor during non-work hours. Full Tort coverage allows recovery for those nagging strains and sprains that affect all people especially those of middle age and older. Let me now show you the economics that favor the insurance industry when their lobby convinced our legislators to allow Pennsylvania citizens to fall into the trap of Limited Tort coverage. By selecting the Limited Tort Option the average policy holder will save anywhere from $100 to $300. By convincing up to 50% of drivers to selected the Limited Tort Option the entire industry has eliminated one-half of the claims they will pay. Their saving is $15,000 per person and up to $30,000 to two or more persons in any one accident. Let's compare $15,000 to $100 or $300 to $30,000. Who wins? I suggest that the Full Tort Option clearly benefits the average family in the long run. You should know that we have been successful in obtaining significant recoveries for Limited Tort clients. They are tough cases but that is who we are. I offer a free review of your auto policy if you send me your declarations page. I will review and call you at a convenient time. In the coming weeks I will discussing other traps devised the insurance industry in the form of "Family Car Exclusion", "Stacking", "Car For Hire", and other terms meant to confuse the average consumer. As always I invite comment. .

It is so sad to see so many good people pay auto insurance premiums for years only to find that when they are in an accident they are informed that they are "not covered" for many of their claims. I want this to be the first of a number of educational guides to the confusing terms and conditions of an automobile insurance policy. The auto law is technically called The Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle financial Responsibility Law (PAMVFRL), 75 Pa.C.S. 1701 et seq. It requires Pa drivers to insure every registered auto they own even if that motor vehicle (MV) is scrapped; if your name is still on it you must provide coverage or you will suffer consequences. The basic coverage required is: Liability: $15,000 per person/ $30,000 per accident

One thing about a long life, and I can claim one, is that we get to see how policies, trends and circumstances bring about changes over time. One such social change is our reaction to the issues of drugs. In the 80's our politicians took a zero tolerance stance and enacted tough laws with long sentences for offenders. Mandatory sentences became en vogue. Before we knew it we were locking up drug addicts at an alarming rate. We captured the dubious distinction of being the Cou...ntry with the highest percentage of its citizens behind bars; higher than Iran, Cuba and even Russia. Building and running prisons became a cottage industry. We realized we had a problem but no politician dared suggest we change Draconian laws; who votes for a candidate "soft" on "crime". Problem 2. It costs at least $45,000 a year to house a prisoner and that is only if he/she is healthy, relatively educated and somewhat resistant to the influences of his/her new roommates. This cost does not include the costs we faced by eliminating the breadwinner from a family. What happens to children of single parent families when that parent is sent to jail. I could go on but You see where this leads. We are now witnessing a glacial shift in attitudes and policies across the nation. Who would have predicted that the purchase and consumption of marijuana would be legal in two states, Colorado and Washington. Are we finally coming to the realization that incarceration of a certain class of drug offender is counter productive? The good news is that the U.S. Sentencing commission in a unanimous vote decided that almost 50,000 federal drug offenders are eligible for reduced sentences. In spite of the obvious problems and difficulties this places on the courts and social programs it marks an enlightened step in national policies. The decision by this independent agency allows half of the nation's federal drug inmates the opportunity to apply for reduced sentences by an average of two years. This is an emotional issue and it would be wise to exercise patience while this phase of a changing approach to an ever present problem is given a chance to work. We must admit that our former "solutions" to this problem was not working. I invite comment. See more

Last week I alerted my friends to the problems we would face if we did not change our policies regarding the influx of children crossing our borders. Today President Obama admitted defeat and asked Congress to immediately address this situation before we are overwhelmed and humane solutions are no longer available. Let's hope that Congress puts aside their differences and works together for a solution.

I understand the policy we have that in order to protect the interests of America we need to spend millions and billions of dollars in foreign countries in an effort to solve problems indigenous to that particular country. Our efforts to stem the effects of huger and disease in certain African countries is money well spent. Money spent in Malaysia and South America to stop deforestation has a direct benefit to us in slowing the effects of climate change. Keeping ISIS Sunni Mi...litants from the Iraqi oil fields deprives them from the financial means to wage a sustained war against the west. These are all good thing. The problem I see is that this policy is not always the best policy. I point to the problem we now have on the Mexican border states with the incredible influx of children and young adults pouring into the states from Guatemala, Honduras and other Central American Countries. At last count we have absorbed 55,000 children in only the last couple of months. Throwing money at these countries is not going to stop this influx any time soon and we simply can't afford to let this go much longer. I get that all of us came to this country as immigrants from a foreign country looking for a better life for our families. I am convinced that sustainable immigration policies are a benefit to any country. New blood brings new ideas, new cultures, new challenges. The problem now is that our social welfare systems can not afford to educate, train, house and support this many people. Our foster care programs are fractured at best. Educators are fighting for every dollar they can get. Unemployment capital is underfunded for even trained workers without a job; how can we afford adding untrained individuals to that system. Medical care is already at the breaking point. I could go on. I do not have a perfect solution to this situation but I do know that we need to come up with a humane way stop the unfettered flow of indigent children into this country. Again, a sustainable immigration policy is a plus to America but if we let this exodus continue we will be setting up refugee camps along the border and there is nothing humane about that. I invite your thoughts. See more

I just read The announcement by GM chief executive Mary T. Barra. She blames the cover up on a pattern of incompetence and neglect. She refused to call it a cover up. Is there a difference? Although I am not satisfied with this corporate "spin" on criminal behavior I am happy to see that a compensation program is due to start August 1 of this year. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families who continue to suffer due to the unnecessary loss of loved ones.

GM is scheduled today to announce how a design flaw remained concealed for years. After more that a dozen deaths and close to 50 accidents GM will apologize to a nation, place blame on one of their departments, probably design or engineering, and walk away feeling like everything is forgiven. I don't buy it. Who were the individuals who knew about these defects and made a conscious decision to hide it. Who were the "consultants" that advised secrecy. Why are many of the vi...ctims of this tragedy being denied reasonable compensation for their losses. The Government has already fined GM $35 million for their failure to timely disclose the defect when they first knew of a problem. Thirteen families lost loved ones. I am proud to say that a trial lawyer was the first to shed a bright light on this tragedy and GM's cover up. If we don't try cases in front of juries situations like this will only get worse. A jury is the conscience of a neighborhood, a city , a county. We are proud to announce that we have again been listed in top verdicts 2013. We were the 16th highest premises verdict in Philadelphia. We turned down settlement offers and placed our trust in the good folks of this city to do the right thing. Our clients know that we will fight for them no matter what it takes. See more

I hope everyone got a chance to participate in the voting process yesterday. The upheaval of the "Arab Spring" has shown the thirst for democracy throughout the world. Voting into office leaders chosen by the people through a valid electoral process is one of the cornerstones of a working democracy. Exercising the right to vote is something we should never take for granted. Our rights should be cherished as the foundation of the American way of life that our soldiers protect at home and in foreign lands. For example our legislative branch of government is a mess and the only way we can change things in by giving voice to change through the voting process. Look at it this way, we all love to complain so why not take those complaints to the voting booth.

New studies suggest that low jury verdicts are contributing to the strain on Social Security and Medicare funds. Years of propaganda from insurance companies has paid off by creating fears in jurors that personal insurance rates will increase every time a large verdict is entered against a negligent party in a lawsuit. Insurers have shifted their risk potential to public funds and their profits have soared. Insurers are accepting high risk individuals and companies with complete confidence that medical care caused by their insured will undervalued and uncompensated due to juror fears. The proof is in the saturation of television commercials from insurers such as Geico and Progressive.

http://www.nsc.org//HomeandRecreati/Falls/Pages/Falls.aspx

Happy Valentines Day. Have a fantastic day with the ones you love.