A UIM insurer does not have a subrogation interest in Lambert advance; the recovery by the insurer from the tortfeasor of a Lambert advance does not create a common fund; and the UIM insurer should not be required to pay attorney’s fees for the recovery of the Lambert advance under the common-fund doctrine.
In Alabama, an insurer would not likely be liable to provide insurance coverage for its insured in instances of road rage or other criminal acts tangentially related to the use of a vehicle.
Commercial motor carriers may be eligible in Alabama to recover damages for loss of use of a commercial vehicle following an accident in which the motor carrier is not at fault.
The US Dept. of Transportation has decided to reformulate CSA scores, which will be re-released in two years.
HIPAA privacy rules apply to DOT medical examination records and limit who should be permitted to obtain the “long form.”
My recent article "Parsing Pell to Provide Context: What Constitutes an Unusual Obstacle or Obstruction?", can be found in the Fall 2015 edition of the Alabama Defense Lawyers Association Journal. I have provided an excerpt below, but the full article can be accessed at the Alabama Defense Lawyers Association website, here. In a matter of first impression, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals held in Pell v. Tidwell that a signaling motorist could not be held liable for the negligent actions of another motorist who fails to independently ensure that it is safe to cross an intersection, especially under normal driving conditions. The...