Firm News

RMI was pleased to participate and co-sponsor “Burn it – to Learn it” - a day long information packed fire investigation and insurance subrogation/adjuster seminar.

The event featured a morning classroom program addressing legal and insurance issues.  The program was held at the Norwich Township and Fire Department state-of-the-art training facility. A live burn was held in the afternoon at the adjacent Franklin County Fairgrounds. The program was attended by approximatey150 representatives of the insurance industry (adjusters, subrogation units and in-house counsel), agents, property managers and local fire officials.

The classroom portion featured insurance issues including proper and compliant notice, roles and duties of the front line adjuster & subrogation unit, scene preservation, avoidance of bad faith claims, impacted third parties, losses involving injuries and proper damage documentation.

RMI partner David Matejczyk was a presenter on the insurance and legal issues from a fire loss.

Ohio’s “sudden-medical emergency” doctrine has long been utilized by defense insurers and counsel to defeat subrogation cases. The defense is often used by insurers who claim a sudden medical or other emergency resulted in a driver losing control of a vehicle and colliding with a building.

In three recent cases, RMI has successfully challenged the defense resulting in $350,000.00 in aggregate subrogated recoveries by way of a verdict and two settlements.

All three cases involved property losses to buildings sharing a common denominator of a complete denial of liability by the vehicle insurer based on the sudden emergency doctrine. Two of the cases involved alleged medical emergencies.

Tim Ita tried a case to verdict in Hamilton County with a 100% liability finding in his client’s favor, an insurer of a retail store. The defendant driver claimed a sudden emergency resulted in his swerving onto the sidewalk and crashing into the storefront. Tim Ita also litigated and settled a claim for $146,000 involving a residential loss where the defense was that the commercial operator of a heavy equipment truck had lost consciousness from choking and collided with the insured’s home.

David Matejczyk recently litigated and resolved a “sudden-medical emergency” case in the sum of $180,000 for a subrogated insurer. The defense insurer maintained its driver collided with a commercial building because she allegedly lost consciousness. In that case, RMI immediately visited the loss site and matched witness statements as to specific locations along the route of travel. It was successfully argued that there was nothing “sudden” about the driver’s loss of consciousness, and that she continued driving despite warning signs of her condition.