This article will cover some more ways in which insurance companies handle and defend auto accident cases.

Medical Bills

Insurance companies will always attempt to use your medical bills against you, often for the propositions 1) that you overtreated; and 2) that they should not be responsible for the cost of diagnostic tests that turned out negative.

Neither concept makes much sense. Insurance companies are generally in no position to assess or govern your medical treatment. Nevertheless, they frequently do just that. Moreover, it is illogical that an insurance company would complain about negative diagnostic test results. Diagnostic tests are ordered by doctors for medical reasons.

If you do not follow-through with an ordered test, and your case proceeds to litigation, you can assume that an insurance defense attorney will raise this issue in the context of a mitigation of damages defense. Nevertheless, when you do follow-through appropriately and tests come out negative, expect an insurance company to complain. I often ask claims adjusters why they are complaining: would they prefer, for instance, that a CT scan or an MRI were positive?

Note, too, that the amount of medical bills in an injury case are generally the primary factor used by an insurance company to evaluate claim value.

Delay in Treatment

Insurance companies also like to point out delay in treatment for the proposition that you were not seriously injuried. Ideally, auto accident victims should go to the hospital (if necessary) on the day of the accident or as soon as possible thereafter. Similarly, you should begin chiropractric treatment or physical therapy as soon as possible after your accident. Long delays in seeking treatment can give rise to numerous defenses including but not limited to a claim of intervening injury. Further, long delays between treatments can give rise to a mitigation of damages defense as well as a claim of intervening injury.

As a simple rule: get treatment as soon as possible after an accident and stick with that treatment until you are released by your doctor.

I've litigated auto accident cases in Nevada since 1988 and during that time I've seen patterns emerge in the way that insurance companies defend these cases. Here are some thoughts in that regard.

Body Damage

Insurance companies are fixated with the issue of body damage to your car after an accident. Or, more specifically, insurance companies often argue that severe damage to your car does not necessarily mean that you were severely damaged and insurance companies and their attorneys always argue that minimal damage to your car means that you were minimally damaged. While this approach is somewhat absurd, I counsel clients to be ready for a fight that will require medical testimony when physical injuries are significant and body damage is minimal.

Mitigation of Damages

There's an old doctrine of law known as mitigation of damages. Simply put, this means that you have to do what's in your power to minimize your damages. For example, if you can go back to work, you should. If you can't go back to the same job due to physical limitations, you should look for another job. Similarly, it's your obligation to seek out and get appropriate medical treatment so that you recover from your injuries as soon as possible. Absences from work due to an injury should be supported by medical evidence. In contested cases, expect a defense attorney to ask your doctor whether extended absence from work was excused and justified. While lost wages are frequently perfectly understandable, clients should be prepared to offer medical evidence that damages in this regard are justified.

I'll touch upon more issues related to how insurance companies defend cases in an article later this week.