Juries are often left out in the cold during trials over many facts that they never get to consider. Relevant case law, legislation, pre-trial rulings, in trial objections and side bar serve the purpose of assuring that the jury never gets to hear certain things that may influence their decision. Oftentimes, after trials, juries will stick around and talk to the attorneys and discuss the cases with them. They often find out after the verdict, of facts they were not allowed to hear that would have swayed their decision one way or another. Some jurors are often shocked at the information they are not allowed to consider when deciding on verdicts that could affect people for the rest of their lives. This series focuses of some of the "evidence" that by one way or another is kept from the consideration of the juries. Good, bad or indifferent, it is a reality in every case that attorneys must limit what information the jury may hear or see prior to deliberating a case.
Florida Statute 627.4136 Nonjoinder of Insurers
Also, known as the "Non-Joinder Statute" is probably the most prejudicial statute that was pushed upon the Florida people. Essentially, when someone is injured because someone broke a safety rule, such as a traffic law, the injured party has a right to be compensated for their losses. It sounds simple, doesn't it? Not really. What this means is that if someone harms you then you are allowed to be made whole by financial compensation for both economic and non-economic damages. These are the rules of our justice system in Florida. If you are any other person causes harms or damages, the protection of an Insurance Policy often comes into play.
Each month you loyally pay your insurance premiums to the companies with the cute commercials that make all these promises to stand by you in a time of need. The protection afforded by insurance is that in the event of a claim, the insurance company will protect the personal financial exposure of the policy holder. This may include the hiring of a defense lawyer to legally defend a lawsuit brought upon by an injured plaintiff. The person causing the harm is named as a defendant in the case (the insurance company is NOT a defendant in a 3rd party action) but they are essentially absent to the process. The defendant doesn't make any decisions or have any control over the process as the insurance company evaluates the claim or ends up in a full blown trial. They do not consult the defendant on any decisions and basically will put their insured in a position that they are essentially "along for the ride". In most cases the defendant appears at trial and unbeknownst to him/her, the insurance company has hired all sorts of experts to defend the case.
The interesting part of this scenario is the reality verse perception issue. The reality is that the defendant has no say so in the defense and the insurance company is protecting their bottom line but the perception is the theater of the mind that is presented to the jury. Under the Non-Joinder Statute, the jury never hears that this individual has an insurance policy. The jury isn't aware that the insurance company is paying the bill for the high-priced defense attorney. In fact, the jury will never hear the name of the insurance company so they presumably assume that giving a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant will come out of this poor individual person's pocket. That's not really fair for the defendant or for the plaintiff.
Insurance Companies don't want People to know the Truth
Insurance companies and their lobbyists vigorously argued for this statute. This provides the insurance companies the ability to cover up the fact that they are involved in the defense of a claim and instead, create an alternate reality that the individual person will be responsible for making the plaintiff whole. In close cases where the liability is in question or there are other mitigating circumstances, juries may not award a full measure of damages because they may question the defendant's ability to pay a certain amount of money. The jury certainly does not have a full picture of the facts, which would lead a reasonable person to hold accountable the insurance carrier that makes billions of dollars in annual profits.
The related farce that is perpetrated upon Florida citizens is that their insurance premiums continue to rise because of greedy plaintiff lawyers and run away juries. The reality is that the true culprit is corporate greed at its finest. Think of this next time you see a cute insurance commercial provides a false sense of security while hiding the actual fiscal responsibility owed to a policy holder by an insurance carrier.
Matthew Dolman is a Trial Lawyer with Dolman Law Group, a Florida Personal Injury Firm representing the seriously injured. If you have questions regarding a potential cause of action wherein you or a loved one has been harmed by the negligence of another party, we are available to stand up for your rights. Matthew may be reached at 727-451-6900 or via email, matt@dolmanlaw.com. Our consultation is always free and we work on a contingency basis, meaning that we only earn a fee when we make a recovery on behalf of our client.
Florida Statute 627.4136 Nonjoinder of Insurers
Also, known as the "Non-Joinder Statute" is probably the most prejudicial statute that was pushed upon the Florida people. Essentially, when someone is injured because someone broke a safety rule, such as a traffic law, the injured party has a right to be compensated for their losses. It sounds simple, doesn't it? Not really. What this means is that if someone harms you then you are allowed to be made whole by financial compensation for both economic and non-economic damages. These are the rules of our justice system in Florida. If you are any other person causes harms or damages, the protection of an Insurance Policy often comes into play.
Each month you loyally pay your insurance premiums to the companies with the cute commercials that make all these promises to stand by you in a time of need. The protection afforded by insurance is that in the event of a claim, the insurance company will protect the personal financial exposure of the policy holder. This may include the hiring of a defense lawyer to legally defend a lawsuit brought upon by an injured plaintiff. The person causing the harm is named as a defendant in the case (the insurance company is NOT a defendant in a 3rd party action) but they are essentially absent to the process. The defendant doesn't make any decisions or have any control over the process as the insurance company evaluates the claim or ends up in a full blown trial. They do not consult the defendant on any decisions and basically will put their insured in a position that they are essentially "along for the ride". In most cases the defendant appears at trial and unbeknownst to him/her, the insurance company has hired all sorts of experts to defend the case.
The interesting part of this scenario is the reality verse perception issue. The reality is that the defendant has no say so in the defense and the insurance company is protecting their bottom line but the perception is the theater of the mind that is presented to the jury. Under the Non-Joinder Statute, the jury never hears that this individual has an insurance policy. The jury isn't aware that the insurance company is paying the bill for the high-priced defense attorney. In fact, the jury will never hear the name of the insurance company so they presumably assume that giving a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant will come out of this poor individual person's pocket. That's not really fair for the defendant or for the plaintiff.
Insurance Companies don't want People to know the Truth
Insurance companies and their lobbyists vigorously argued for this statute. This provides the insurance companies the ability to cover up the fact that they are involved in the defense of a claim and instead, create an alternate reality that the individual person will be responsible for making the plaintiff whole. In close cases where the liability is in question or there are other mitigating circumstances, juries may not award a full measure of damages because they may question the defendant's ability to pay a certain amount of money. The jury certainly does not have a full picture of the facts, which would lead a reasonable person to hold accountable the insurance carrier that makes billions of dollars in annual profits.
The related farce that is perpetrated upon Florida citizens is that their insurance premiums continue to rise because of greedy plaintiff lawyers and run away juries. The reality is that the true culprit is corporate greed at its finest. Think of this next time you see a cute insurance commercial provides a false sense of security while hiding the actual fiscal responsibility owed to a policy holder by an insurance carrier.
Matthew Dolman is a Trial Lawyer with Dolman Law Group, a Florida Personal Injury Firm representing the seriously injured. If you have questions regarding a potential cause of action wherein you or a loved one has been harmed by the negligence of another party, we are available to stand up for your rights. Matthew may be reached at 727-451-6900 or via email, matt@dolmanlaw.com. Our consultation is always free and we work on a contingency basis, meaning that we only earn a fee when we make a recovery on behalf of our client.
