The Plaintiff usually has the burden to prove that the Defendant was negligent and that the Defendant’s negligence caused him injury. However, in cases where two accidents happen so close together that one cannot tell which accident caused which injury, what is a Plaintiff to do? This was the question posed to the Nevada Supreme Court in the case of Kleitz v. Raskin, 103 Nev. 325, 728 P.2d 508 (1987). In Kleitz, the Plaintiff sustained injury in two successive automobile accidents, one … [Read more...]
Archives for October 2011
The Burden On Apportionment Of Damages Shifts To The Defendant Where Two Separate Accidents Cause An Inseparable Injury
October 12, 2011 by
An Insurance Company Must Respond To A Subpoena Involving Ongoing Third-Party Litigation.
October 4, 2011 by
With escalating frequency, we at Mills & Associates are seeing aggressive plaintiffs serve subpoenas directly on the defendant’s insurance carriers. These subpoenas often request records that the retained defense attorney has already produced. Sometimes they will request a particular claims adjuster appear and testify about those records. By doing so, plaintiffs are hoping to identify documents or information that the retained defense attorney has improperly withheld. We thought our … [Read more...]
