Penwell, TX Personal Injury Law Firms & Lawyers

I can only answer some of your questions. Your "Question" and the "Question Detail" are not very similar so it is hard to answer your actual "Question." To try and answer your actual "Question" the "fair amount" is what the medical provider is willing to accept from the "insurance" company as full payment less any co-pays or deductibles. For example, a medical provider may charge $100.00 for some service. The insurance company and medical provider may have a contract in which the insurance company only has to pay $80.00 to the medical provider. An insurance company may not have a contract but still may be able to get the medical provider to accept less. I am not licensed in Arizona so I cannot answer any questions about the law there as it relates to paying back your insurance company. However, assuming your insurance policy is governed by Nebraska, you likely have a contractual duty to repay your insurance company. Your insurance policy probably has provisions regarding "reimbursement" and "subrogation", which are legally different, but basically have the same meaning, which is, that if you recover from a third party (including an insurance company), you have to repay your insurance company. However, you would have to check your policy to see what effect, if any, if what the other insurance company is saying about Arizona law (not having to repay your insurance company) is true. This would depend, in part, on the specific language of your policy. I cannot answer the question whether "$2622" is a fair amount to settle your case for. I would need to know a lot more about your injuries and damages. Lastly, as to your "legal obligations as far as my medical expenses" you have a legal obligation to pay your medical providers. They provided you a service and are entitled to be paid. They do not have to wait until your settle your case to receive their money. They might be willing to wait but they do not have to. This response is not a substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor is it a solicitation to offer legal advice. If you ignore this warning and convey confidential information in a private message or comment, there is no duty to keep that information confidential or forego representation adverse to your interests. You should seek the advice of a licensed attorney in the appropriate jurisdiction before taking any action that may affect your rights. If you believe you have a claim against someone, you should consult an attorney immediately, otherwise there is a risk that the time allotted to bring your claim may expire.

Based on the "Detail" provided you likely cannot sue your employer for your back injury. There is a two year statute of limitations for workers compensation claims, which means that either you must have an agreement with the employer or a lawsuit must be on file within 2 years from your injury or your case is time barred and you cannot receive any money. From the information you provided, it does not appear that the employer paid any workers' compensation benefits so one of the ways the statute of limitation can be extended would not apply. There is another exception that extends this 2 statute of limitations period. If you provided "notice" to your employer that you had a work-related injury at or very near the time of your injury and the employer failed to file the required report to the Nebraska Workers Compensation Court, then the statute of limitations does not start until the employer files this report. (See Nebraska Revised Statute 48-144.04). The "notice" about your injured must either be in writing or sufficient enough, based on "a reasonable person" standard, to let the employer know that you might have a work-related injury that they may need to investigate. It is unclear from the information provided in your message whether you provided any notice to the employer so it is unclear whether this exception would apply. This response is based on the limited information provided, makes certain assumptions, and assumes that all events took place in Nebraska. In addition, this response is not a substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor is it a solicitation to offer legal advice. If you ignore this warning and convey confidential information in a private message or comment, there is no duty to keep that information confidential or forego representation adverse to your interests. You should seek the advice of a licensed attorney in the appropriate jurisdiction before taking any action that may affect your rights. If you believe you have a claim against someone, you should consult an attorney immediately, otherwise there is a risk that the time allotted to bring your claim may expire.

Yes. Generally speaking, homeowners' insurance provides coverage for liability and medical expenses arising from bodily injury sustained by a third party while on the insureds' property. However, it is possible that your insurance company may attempt to allege that this act is excluded from coverage because it was an "intentional" act. Intentional acts are excluded from Texas homeowners' insurance policies. Regarding your second question of parent-child liability, as a general rule minors are civilly responsible for their own torts. However, a parent can be liable for the acts of a child under various theories of liability including but not limited to negligent conduct, willful & malicious conduct, and a duty to control the child.