Three people were injured in a Washington auto accident after their van went off the roadway and slid down an embankment. According to King5 News, the single car accident occurred in the 17000 block of State Route 900 in Renton. Washington State Patrol officials said the 2003 Ford Econoline van veered off the roadway and went into a ditch and then struck an embankment. The driver and two passengers were all ejected from the van. The driver was ejected in spite of wearing a seatbelt, officials said. However he sustained the least of the injuries. Two others, who were not wearing their seatbelts, are in serious condition. Troopers believe alcohol was involved in the crash. The driver was arrested on suspicion of DUI.

Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a serious crime in Washington State. According to the Revised Code of Washington Section 46.61.502, driving under the influence is when "a person is guilty of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person drives a vehicle within the state." It is also illegal to drive with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or higher.

In such cases, victims can file a claim with the help of an experienced car accident Seattle lawyer against the at-fault party to cover their medical expenses, loss of earnings, cost of hospitalization, therapy and other related damages. This incident is also an important reminder for all of us to wear seatbelts. There is no question that seatbelts save lives.

The Washington State Liquor Control Board has issued citations to two Spokane bars in connection with a DUI car crash in December, which resulted in three deaths. According to an Associated Press news report, the driver who caused the head-on collision was "over-served" at the downtown Spokane bars a The Lion's Lair and the BLVD. Officials say they want the BLVD's license suspended for a month and are asking for a five-day suspension or a fine against the Lion's Lair. The drunk driver apparently drove west in the eastbound lanes of the Interstate 90 in Spokane. The drunk driver, as well as two people in the other car, were killed in the collision.

This news, interestingly enough, comes around the same time as when Men's Health and USA Today released a study listing Spokane 51st among the "Drunkest Cities" in the United States. In fact, Spokane ranked higher than Seattle on this list. By assisting drunk driving accident victims, Seattle auto accident lawyers are working to help lower the cityas ranking as the 64th drunkest city in the United States.

A pedestrian was critically injured in a Spokane car accident in the South Hill area, according to a KXLY news report. The injury collision occurred at the intersection of 10th and Oak where the victim was hit by a car. The driver of the car fled the scene of the crash. The victim was taken to a local hospital. The pedestrian is believed to have sustained life-threatening injuries. The suspectas vehicle has been described as a light brown or blue sedan with a loud muffler.

As a Seattle car accident attorney, Kirk Bernard understands the serious consequences of hit-and-run accidents. Leaving the scene of an auto collision is a serious crime in Washington State and is punishable by jail time. According to the Revised Code of Washington Section 46.52.020: "A driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in the injury to or death of any person or involving striking the body of a deceased person shall immediately stop such vehicle at the scene of such accident or as close thereto as possible but shall then forthwith return to, and in every event remain at, the scene of such accident until he or she has fulfilled the requirements of subsection (3) of this section; every such stop shall be made without obstructing traffic more than is necessary."

Four people were hospitalized with injuries from a Washington car accident on a collision on Highway 99, The Seattle Times reports. A collision between two cars sent one car off the roadway and into adjacent railroad tracks. Another car rolled over and landed on its roof. The four victims were transported to a Seattle hospital for treatment of their injuries. The extent of their injuries is not known. Drugs or alcohol were not involved in the accident. Seattle police are still investigating the cause of the accident.

In auto accident cases where two or more vehicles are involved, one of the most important questions to ask is, aWho was at fault for the accident?a If the collision occurred at an intersection, it is possible that one of the drivers failed to yield right-of-way at the intersection or ran a red light or stop sign. Seattle car accident lawyers often see first-hand how speed, driving recklessly or distracted driving may be common reasons for collisions taking place.

A 50-year-old driver was injured in a Washington car accident after his 2005 Toyota pickup truck was rear-ended by a 1997 Nissan Maxima. The driver of the Toyota was making a left turn into the Sundown M. Ranch from the northbound State Route 821 in Selah, Washington, the Yakima Herald-Republic reports. Both drivers were transported to a local hospital. The extent of their injuries is not known. Officials believe that the woman driving the Maxima may have been inattentive just before the collision occurred. It is not clear what she was doing at the time.

Distractions and inattention amount to negligence when it comes to vehicular accidents. Distractions could include anything from talking on a hand-held cell phone, texting, eating, applying makeup or looking out the window at something that caught your eye. This is how most rear-end accidents are caused and several of these incidents often result in serious injuries. It could cause head injuries, spinal cord injuries or other types of neck and back injuries. Whiplash is one of the most common consequences of a rear-end collision. If you have been injured in a car accident as a result of a rear-end collision caused by a negligent driver, you can file a claim with the help of a Seattle car accident attorney seeking compensation for the medical expenses incurred as well as loss of wages.

A 25-year-old man died in a Washington auto accident after he drove the wrong way on Interstate 90 and crashed into a truck. According to a news report in the Snoqualmie Valley Record Reporter, the Bremerton man was driving a 2000 Jeep Cherokee east in the westbound lanes near milepost 28. The Jeep narrowly missed a Washington State Patrol trooper's vehicle and crashed into a bakery truck. The Jeep driver died. His 25-year-old female passenger sustained serious injuries as did the driver of the truck. Both injured victims were transported to a Seattle hospital. Police believe that alcohol was a factor in this fatal car accident.

It is against the law in Washington State to drive under the influence of intoxicants such as alcohol or drugs. It is also illegal to drive with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or higher. According to the Washington State Department of Transportation, there were a total of 521 traffic accident fatalities in 2008. Out of those, 225 or 43 percent were alcohol-related collisions. Also, 182 of these DUI collisions (about 35 percent), involved a driver with a blood alcohol level of more than 0.08 percent.

In cases where someone has been struck by a drunk driver, the victim can file a claim against the driver's insurance seeking compensation. Victims in such cases, can seek compensation to cover medical expenses, lost wages, cost of hospitalization and other related damages. If the drunk driver who caused the accident dies in the crash, then a claim for compensation can be filed against the driver's estate or his liability insurance. These can be complicated claims and are best handled by an experienced Seattle personal injury lawyer who has successfully represented injured car accident victims.

Chrysler has issues an auto product defect recall for more than 355,500 minivans because of a defective airbag sensor, which could cause the airbag to fail in the event of a car accident. According to a news report, Chrysler's recall scheduled to begin in June, covers 355,562 of its 2005-2006 Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan minivans, including 259,437 in the United States and 72,035 in Canada.

Chrysler officials said they found that one of the front airbag crash sensors could crack under certain environmental conditions and allow water to enter the sensor causing the sensor to become inoperative. So far, no injuries or fatalities relating to these defects have been reported. If the front crash sensors become inoperative in these vehicles, the driver will be warned by the airbag warning light. However, until the vehicle is repaired, the occupants of the vehicle may not receive protection in the event of a car crash.

Airbag defects can result in devastating injuries or even death. Thanks to modern vehicle technology, airbags are an important safety feature in all vehicles today and if they function the way they are supposed to, they definitely offer enhanced protection to the vehicle's occupants. The most common airbag defects in vehicles are failure to deploy and unintentional deployment a which means they deploy when they are not supposed to deploy. Both of these occurrences may result in serious injuries.

If you suspect an airbag malfunction caused your serious injuries or caused your car accident, please contact a reputable Seattle auto accident law firm. Make sure you preserve the vehicle in its current condition, in tact, so it can be examined by an expert for any evidence of product defects. Doing away with the vehicle may destroy the only evidence you may have in an auto products liability case.

Toyota has recalled more than 8.5 million vehicles over auto product defects a primarily sticky gas pedals, defective floor mats that can slip and jam the accelerator, and brake issues. Based on news reports, outside experts even speculate that electromagnetic interference may have caused several incidents of unintended acceleration in recalled Toyota models. Now, the auto maker is facing a government inquiry over whether it tried to delay or avoid a recall in the first place.

Parents of a Seattle resident are one of many who are asking questions about how and why their son died. According to a KOMO News report, like many injured victims or grieving families, the bereaved parents are wondering whether sudden acceleration caused by a sticky gas pedal in the victimas Toyota Tundra may have caused the fatal car accident on Oct. 17, 2007. The crash occurred when the pickup truck inexplicably crashed head-on into a tree.

Recently this victimas parents found out that his Tundra was on the recall list as well. They now rightly believe that had Toyota paid attention to the problem, recalled the vehicles and fixed the defects, their son would have been alive.

Toyota's recall comes too late for those in situations similar to this familyas. It is too little too late for those who have suffered catastrophic injuries potentially as a result of the unintended acceleration problem. It is too late for those drivers who have been sent to prison because their car went out of control and injured or killed someone. Seattle personal injury attorneys understand that there have been several car accident cases nationwide where drivers tried convincing juries that it was not them, but their car that was to blame. But no one believed them. Some of those cases are now being reviewed by local prosecutors in different parts of the country.

Two people sustained serious injuries in a Washington auto accident after they were struck by a car while walking on Southwest 356th Street in Federal Way. According to a news report in the Seattle Times, the driver who struck and injured the pedestrian tried to leave the scene, but was apprehended by police and arrested on suspicion of hit-and-run. One of the victims was airlifted to a Seattle hospital due to suffering life-threatening injuries. The other victim, a 50-year-old man, was also transported to a local hospital, but his injuries are not believed to be as serious as the other pedestrian. Officials are also looking into whether alcohol or drugs were involved in this major injury collision.

Several motorists and skilled Seattle car accident lawyers know that leaving the scene of an accident is a serious violation of Washington State Law. According to the Revised Code of Washington Section 46.52.020: "A driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in the injury to or death of any person or involving striking the body of a deceased person shall immediately stop such vehicle at the scene of such accident or as close thereto as possible but shall then forthwith return to, and in every event remain at, the scene of such accident until he or she has fulfilled the requirements of subsection (3) of this section; every such stop shall be made without obstructing traffic more than is necessary."

A Chicago personal injury lawyer at Abels & Annes has resolved a claim stemming from a June, 2011 car crash. The plaintiff was driving to work just after 8 AM and was traveling southwest on Ogden Avenue approaching Oak Park Avenue in Berwyn, Illinois. The defendant was driving northeast on Ogden Avenue approaching Oak Park Avenue.

Our client had a green light at the intersection of Ogden and Oak Park and proceeded to drive her 2005 Chrysler PT cruiser straight. The at fault driver attempted to make a left turn in his Toyota Corolla onto northbound Oak Park without yielding the right-of-way to the Chrysler. The defendant turned left and struck the plaintiff in a head-on collision. The force of the impact pushed the PT cruiser across a lane of traffic and towards the shoulder of Ogden Avenue.

The Berwyn Police Department responded to the scene of the Illinois auto collision and determined the Toyota driver caused the accident. He received a citation for failure to yield the right-of-way at an intersection while turning left and later pleaded guilty to that charge and court.

Following the incident our client had an immediate onset of neck, back, and chest pain. She was taken from the scene of the occurrence by ambulance to MacNeal Hospitalas Emergency Department. A history was taken, she was examined and diagnostic tests were performed.

On exam, she had pain and tenderness to her chest wall and paraspinal muscles in her back. She was diagnosed with neck strain and back strain, prescribed muscle relaxants and pain medication, instructed to follow up with a physician, and discharged.

She followed up with a medical doctor on July 1, 2011. She complained of pain in her back, neck, chest and head as well as soreness all over. She struggled with daily activities, including grooming, showering, household cleaning and recreational activities. Her physician diagnosed her with cervical spine sprain/strain and multiple contusions. He prescribed a course of physical therapy and instructed her to follow up in two weeks.

Per physician instructions, the plaintiff engaged in a course of physical therapy at AthletiCo Physical Therapy beginning on July 7, 2011. She had pain throughout her daily activities and was limited in her actions. As a pharmacist, our client had difficulty at work because her pain interfered with her ability to do her job. She liked to run and exercise before the collision and could not do so as a result of her injuries. She engaged in several sessions of physical therapy and was discharged on September 30, 2011.

Our client returned to her doctor on July 15, 2011. She continued to complain of pain to her neck, back, chest and head and noted that she was very stiff and achy. She was engaged in the prescribed therapy but was obtaining minimal relief. Her physician instructed her to continue physical therapy and to follow up in two weeks.

Illinois pedestrian accident attorneys at our office are in the process of trying to resolve a case for a woman that was struck by a car crossing the street in a crosswalk. The claim arises out of an automobile vs. pedestrian collision which took place on September 18, 2011 at approximately 5:10 p.m. in Chicago.

The pedestrian was crossing Belmont Avenue at its intersection with Seminary. The defendant was driving westbound on Belmont, approaching Seminary. Traffic was at a stop and our client began to cross in a marked pedestrian crosswalk.

The motorist then attempted to pass a stopped vehicle even though her vision of the crosswalk was obstructed by the stopped traffic. The driver struck our client while she was within the crosswalk. The passenger side of her vehicle struck the pedestrian's ribs and leg while the tire of the vehicle ran over her foot.

The Chicago Police Department responded to the scene of the collision. The responding officer determined the defendant was at fault for the collision and issued him a ticket for failing to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a pedestrian.

We are alleging to the at-fault driver's auto carrier, Geico Insurance, that she failed to keep a proper lookout, failed to stop and/or reduce his speed to avoid a collision, failed to yield the right-of-way, and failed to exercise due care for the safety of those in the area.

Immediately following the accident, the injured pedestrian sought medical treatment at Illinois Masonic Hospitalas Emergency Department. Upon arrival at the Emergency Department, a history was taken, she was examined, and diagnostic tests were performed, including x-rays of her chest, knee, and foot. She complained of pain in her ribs, left foot, and left leg and knee. On exam, she had pain on palpation of her left chest. She was diagnosed with bruised ribs, a left foot contusion and a left knee contusion. She was prescribed pain medication, instructed to follow up with a physician, and discharged.

She sought follow up medical treatment from a doctor on September 26, 2011. At that time, she continued to complain of severe rib pain and lower back pain. A history was taken and a physical exam was performed. Her physician ordered her to undergo an ultrasound of her spleen and referred her to physical therapy for her lower back pain.

She again followed up at the doctor's on October 7, 2011. She experienced severe, sharp rib pain that morning and continued to experience the pain with deep breathing. X-rays of her chest were ordered to rule out a possible rib fracture. The x-rays were normal.

The client has not yet returned for additional treatment, but continues to have ongoing discomfort due to the negligence of the defendant. It is likely she will need additional treatment in the near future.

Illinois injury lawyers at Abels & Annes are hard at work on a car crash claim for a local resident. The case arises out of a collision which took place on August 23, 2011 at approximately 9:07 a.m. The plaintiff was injured when the automobile she was riding in was involved in a collision with an uninsured motor vehicle.

Our client was driving her 2008 Scion westbound on Ferdinand, approaching its intersection with Pulaski in Chicago, Illinois. At that time a driver in a 1997 Buick LeSabre was being pursued by police officers at a high rate of speed. The uninsured driver was traveling northbound on Pulaski and turned abruptly eastbound on Ferdinand. The Buick crossed the center line and hit the client head-on at a very high speed.

Our client was thrown backward and forward in her seat and hit her face on the airbag. The entire incident was witnessed by a Chicago Police Officer who was responding to the high-speed chase. The responding officer determined the uninsured driver caused the collision by operating her vehicle in an erratic, reckless, careless, negligent or aggressive condition.

The uninsured driver failed to keep a proper lookout, failed to stop and/or reduce her speed to avoid a collision, traveled eastbound in a lane marked only for westbound traffic, drove in an erratic and reckless manner, and failed to exercise due care for the safety of those in the area, including the plaintiff.

This accident is just another example of why it is so important to carry auto insurance with uninsured motorist coverage. There is an ongoing and alarming trend of motorists in Illinois driving without insurance. We see more and more of these accidents at our office.

Following the collision, the client had an immediate onset of pain. She was transported from the scene of the collision by ambulance to West Suburban Hospital in Oak Park, Illinois. Upon arrival at the Emergency Department, a history was taken, she was examined, and diagnostic tests were performed. She complained of a severe headache and pain to her right wrist. On exam, she had a burn to her right forearm and a head injury. She underwent a head CT scan which revealed no acute intracranial abnormalities. She was prescribed pain medication and instructed to seek follow up treatment from a doctor.

Due to ongoing and increasing pain, the plaintiff sought follow up treatment with a medical doctor on September 1, 2011. At that time, she complained of constant, sharp pain along her neck as well as sharp lumbar pain that radiated to both of her legs. She has lupus and had some difficulty walking before the collision but the pain in her lower back made walking significantly more difficult, and at times, impossible without the assistance of a cane or walker. A history was taken and she was examined. She had pain in her paracervical muscles in her neck as well as lower back and muscle spasms. The physician diagnosed her with a sprain and strain of the cervical and lumbar spines. He ordered x-rays of her cervical and lumbar spines and instructed her to begin a course of physical therapy.

Illinois car crash lawyers at Abels & Annes are currently representing a Dolton, Illinois resident who was injured in an accident.

This claim arises out of an automobile collision which took place at or near the intersection of Lincoln and Dorchester in Dolton on August 11, 2011, at approximately 3:51 p.m. The plaintiff was riding as a passenger in a 2005 Toyota Sequoia being driven by an acquaintance. He was injured when the automobile he was a passenger in was side-swiped by a vehicle driven by an uninsured motorist.

The Toyota was moving northwest on Lincoln near its intersection with Dorchester. The vehicle stopped in the left-most lane, signaling a left turn into US Bank. At this location, left turns are permitted and there is no separate left turn lane for turning into the bank.

At that same time, another vehicle, in 1999 Ford Explorer, was traveling northwest on Lincoln near its intersection with Dorchester. That vehicle disregarded the turning vehicle and passed the vehicle on the left. The other driver drove northwest in a lane designated for southeast traffic only. As the Ford Explorer passed by driving on the wrong side of the road, the other driver struck the driveras side of the Toyota with the passenger side of her car.

The force of the collision threw our client back and forth inside the car. His right shoulder struck the passenger door and his left wrist struck the center console.

The other driver failed to keep a proper lookout, improperly used lanes of traffic, improperly passed on the left, failed to yield the right of way, failed to stop and/or reduce the speed of her vehicle to avoid a collision, was driving at an excessive rate of speed, and failed to exercise due care for the safety of those in the area, including the plaintiff.

The accident was investigated by the Dolton Police Department. After interviewing the parties involved, they determined that the Ford driver was at fault.

Unfortunately, the driver of the Ford Explorer was operating a vehicle without valid auto insurance. Due to this fact, our office is pursuing an uninsured motorist claim against the Toyota owner's insurance policy. Click here to read more about Illinois uninsured motorist claims.

Following the collision, the plaintiff had an immediate onset of back, shoulder and wrist pain.

Shortly after the collision, the client sought medical treatment at a doctor's office. There, he complained of right shoulder pain and lower back pain. A history was taken and a physical examination was performed. On exam, he had pain on palpation of his lower back, pain in his right shoulder and decreased range of motion in his shoulder. He was diagnosed with a low back sprain and a right shoulder injury. He was prescribed muscle relaxants, instructed to take pain medication and told to follow up for additional treatment.

Due to ongoing and increasing pain, he returned to the physician on August 23, 2011. At that time he continued to complain of pain in his right shoulder and lower back. He was instructed to continue his medication and to return for follow up care.

This is part two in a two part series relating to social benefits from personal injury lawsuits.

Georgian Luger Nodar Kumaritashvili died on February 12, 2010. He should not have.

Lawsuits remind people to take the care necessary to make sure they do not injure others.

The designer of the luge course and the International Olympic Committee knew in advance how dangerous the course was and still sent relatively inexperienced luge riders down the track. They knew athletes were crashing more often, and at higher speeds than normally occur in the sport.

Such dangerous conditions occur because the speed and danger of the track make the event sell better. It makes the race more exciting. It also saves the money that should have been spend on having an engineer review the course to determine how high that safety wall should have been, and the expense of making the course safer, including a higher wall and padding and barricading the steal beams next to the track.

Huffington Post blogger Marian Salzman wrote: aWith 82 countries participating in the Games this year, shouldn't the course have been designed to be safe for all of them? Where were the safety wardens?a

Personal injury lawyers are part of the safety wardens in Southern California. Any business knows that when they produce a defective product or a dangerous product, and sell it, personal injury lawyers will hold them accountable. Personal injury attorneys will make them pay for their negligence. So, manufacturers are more careful.

Even when you drive on the freeway, people watch how fast they are going. Why donat people speed more? Because they do not want to get a ticket. The reason people do not want to get tickets is because it will make their insurance rates go up. Tickets make insurance rates go up because speeding causes auto accidents. It places other people in unnecessary danger.

When drivers hurt people, car accident attorneys hold the negligent driver accountable. These lawsuits give people a reason to be more careful when they drive. Drivers are forced to think about the safety of others not only to protect other people (which is the right thing to do), but also to prevent their insurance rates from going up.

This is part 3 in a series of posts explaining benefits of lawsuits and insurance claims when people in Southern California are injured in an accident.

People buy insurance for several reasons. Some buy insurance because the law says they have to. Some people buy insurance to protect themselves. If they are negligent and hurt someone in an a car crash (it can happen to anyone), they want to make sure it does not cost them a lot of money which can take away from their retirement, or their kidas college education fund. Still other people buy insurance because they want to make sure that if they cause an auto accident and hurt someone, the person they injure is taken care of. They want to make sure that they have the means to take care of any injury they cause.

The minute you are hurt in a pedestrian accident, or in any car accident in Southern California, or from any negligence of another, under California law, you are entitled to fair compensation for your injuries. The reality of modern insurance companies, is that you will have to fight to get the compensation that is rightfully yours.

This is part 2 in a series relating to San Fernando Valley Car Crash Claims as a benefit to everyone

I was recently contacted by a friend asking for help. Her sister was crossing the street in Woodland Hills, in a crosswalk and was hit by a car which was coming from Encino. She suffered a significant injury, yet, she did not want to talk to a lawyer and did not want to seek compensation for her injuries. She felt bad for the person that hit her.

I explained to my friend that her sister has been brainwashed by the insurance companies, and she has no reason to feel sorry for them. The person that hit her had insurance. California law requires that you have insurance if you drive. The person that hit her was negligent. Generally, when there is a car accident, where a car hits a pedestrian in a crosswalk, the driver is at fault. Therefore, the pedestrian is entitled to be compensated for her injuries. She is entitled to receive medical attention for her injuries. If it was my family member that was hurt, I would want them to get medical care. The driver (or her insurance company), is legally obligated to pay for that care.

The pedestrian is also entitled to be compensated for her pain and suffering. That phrase has almost become a bad word in our system of justice. It should not be. She was injured. It is painful. It is inconvenient. It forces huge negative changes on a personas life. For example, I want to play with my son tomorrow morning. If I am injured in a collision such that either I cannot lift him in the air, or tickle him, or if I have to endure pain when I do it, that is not fair. If you came to me and said, aI will pay you $100 not to play with your son tomorrow, I would not take the money.a How much is fair compensation. At what point would I say, aOkay, I will take the money and not play for one day; or maybe two days, or maybe six months.a

It seems only fair that a person should be compensated when they are harmed because someone else is negligent.

The other part of this equation is that in California, you will not be compensated for the cost of hiring an attorney to help you. Unfortunately, insurance companies are less than willing to provide the fair compensation that they are supposed to provide. That means that people that are injured require legal assistance. If they only receive the cost of their medical care, they are not truly compensated. Pain and suffering compensation, or non-economic damages as it is called, defrays the cost of the legal assistance.

This is part one in a series on why Los Angeles car accident victims should be compensated for their injuries.

There are a lot of lawsuits filed every year in Los Angeles County. Many of those cases stem from auto accidents. Yet when we talk to jurors, they all complain that there are too many frivolous lawsuits. If you ask for more detail, most cannot explain why they feel this way, they have simply been told by the media and the insurance companies that there are too many lawsuits.

Certainly not every automobile accident need result in a lawsuit, nor must every injury result in a lawsuit. Sometimes, people are injured simply because they are careless. Sometimes, people are injured because somebody else is careless. In Southern California and throughout the United States, our laws are designed to protect us from the negligence of others. Thus serves two purposes: (1) it compensates the injured; and (2) it encourages people to be safe and protect others.

As car accident lawyers located in Woodland Hills, we review our clientas auto insurance policies all the time. By the time we do so, it is because someone has been in a car accident and has been injured. As personal injury lawyers handling auto accidents in the San Fernando Valley, we are here to make sure our clients are properly compensated for the injuries that were caused by the accident.

Unfortunately, at that point, it is too late to talk about what insurance they should have had.

One of the first steps in helping our clients is looking at their auto insurance coverage. California law requires that all drivers have basic liability coverage of at least $15,000. It is a misdemeanor to drive without insurance. In addition, you are required to notify the DMV if you are in an accident and let them know who your insurance company is. We handle this process for our clients. Without question, this is the easy part, everyone should/must have at least the minimum required insurance coverage of $15,000.

That is not the end of the question. Liability coverage, that is coverage which will be paid out to someone you may injure if you cause an accident and serves two important functions.

Protect Yourself and Your Family: First, insurance protects you and your family. If you cause a collision, if you do not have adequate coverage, the person you hit may be able to take the money you have been saving for retirement, your childas college education, a new home, or whatever is important to you.

Second: It protects the person you hit. That is a good thing. We should all take responsibility for our own actions. If we are careless and we hurt somebody, they should be compensated for what we have done. That is fair. That is also part of the purpose of insurance, to make sure someone we accidentally hurt is cared for, without destroying our own life. To hurt someone is to take something away from them. Not to compensate them for their injury; paying for the damage to their car, paying their medical bills, and paying for the imposition on their life (pain and suffering), is like stealing.

However, when you accidentally hurt someone, that does not mean your life should be destroyed either. That is part of the purpose of insurance. It enables us to properly compensate someone we hit, without taking away from our own life.

That brings us back to the question, aHow much insurance should I have.a The answer to that question is going to depend on your income and your savings. If you have limited assets and limited income, you can likely only afford basic coverage. You can drive legally and provide some protection to someone you injure. If you have a lot of assets, you should probably have an umbrella insurance policy. To qualify for an umbrella policy, you will have to have a certain amount of auto insurance. Those people will probably need to have $250,000 in liability coverage.

Driving in Los Angeles while holding a cell phone is a bad idea. Holding a cell phone to your head not only affects your concentration, but also restricts your ability to check your blind spots and turn the wheel. It is no surprise that there is a correlation between holding a cell phone while driving and auto accidents.

Last July, a new law came into effect which prohibits talking on a cell phone while holding it. It is worth commenting on this new law because as I drive around the streets I still see people holding their cell phone and talking while driving. I suppose much like when the seatbelt law came into effect, it will take some time before people figure out that this law does have a purpose and it makes sense.

Oddly enough, this law does not prohibit reading and writing text messages while driving. Fortunately, that has been rectified and now it is unlawful to text message while driving.

These new laws have been a boon to the Bluetooth industry which has seen huge sales increases in the past year. There has also been a terrific improvement in the quality of these devices. There are many low-cost good-quality Bluetooth devices available which make it legal to use your cell phone while driving.

Although itas too late for drivers who have already suffered personal injuries in auto accidents, a side benefit to this law is that it has increased awareness in the dangers of driving while holding a cell phone. This alone has helped reduce the number of car crashes in California. Until drivers adopt this new law, there will be still be a high need for Los Angeles Auto Accident Attorneys.

As personal injury attorneys in Woodland Hills, we get too many phone calls from people injured in automobile collisions in the rain. Certainly there is nothing good about being in a crash. When it rains here in Southern California, you should take simple precautions to do what you can to make sure you are not injured in a car accident.

The most obvious tip is to slow down. Unfortunately, while everyone knows this is the safest suggestions, in our busy lives, it is also the tip we are mostly likely to forget. Leave a little earlier (after all, there is going to be more traffic) and drive a little slower.

This is especially true in the first rain following a dry spell. When it is dry, there is a build up of oil and grease from cars on the road. When the rain hits this, it makes the road very slippery. The first few hours are exceptionally dangerous.

Another good suggestion is to brake earlier than you normally would and use less force. Not only does this give you more time and distance to stop between you and the car in front of you, it lets the person behind you know what you are doing earlier and allows them to make sure they can stop without hitting you.

Some other valuable suggestions to help you from being involved in an auto accident on a rainy day are stay towards the middle of the road, do not use cruise control, avoid driving through large puddles, tap your brakes gently after crossing a puddle to help dry your brakes, turn on your headlights, and never brake suddenly.

One final suggestion that is often overlooked is to make sure your windshield wipers are in good condition. Wiping the windows with a wiper that leaves them smeared and worse than when you started only makes driving more dangerous and accidents more likely.

Be safe out there.