- My name is Justin Ziegler.
I'm an attorney with JZ helps,
an injury law firm in Florida,
and today I'm going to talk about
whether a pedestrian has a case
if they're hit by a car in Florida.
This entire talk assumes that the driver
that hit the pedestrian
was somehow at fault for the crash.
What types of compensation can a pedestrian get
if they're hit by a car?
Can generally get the same types of damages,
otherwise known as compensation,
as any other accident in Florida, okay?
I'm not gonna go over all 14 or 15 types of damages,
but just understand you can get
your out-of-pocket medical expenses paid,
lost wages that you don't receive,
and money for pain and suffering.
Again, this all assumes the driver
was at least partially at fault or totally at fault,
and I'll get into that a little bit later.
I wrote a separate article
on how a pedestrian can get his or her medical bills paid
after a car accident in Florida.
I just wanna hammer this point home.
A driver needs to be at fault in order for a pedestrian
to get money for pain and suffering,
out of pocket medical bills,
lost wages, and other types of compensation.
So, what are common pedestrian types,
the common types of pedestrian accidents
where a pedestrian ends up
receiving money for their damages?
This is a midblock pedestrian crash.
It's one of the more common types of accidents.
And as you can see,
the pedestrian is not in the intersection.
There's a car proceeding.
The car strikes the pedestrian.
Now, again, I've talked about the fact
that the driver needs to be at fault
in order for the pedestrian to get any money.
Here, is the driver at fault?
Possibly.
As you can see, the driver is in the most interior
or inside lane.
Arguably, he or she had some more time
to see the pedestrian walk across the street.
But you can also see
that the pedestrian is not in an intersection,
so the pedestrian's gonna have a large amount of fault.
And one of the things you do when evaluating
the full value of the claim is you say first,
"Is the driver at fault?"
We'll assume yes, at least somewhat, for this accident.
But then you say, "Is the pedestrian at fault also?"
And the total value of the compensation
that a pedestrian would normally be able to get,
you subject the percentage
of negligence or fault on the pedestrian.
So, in this case, let's say the pedestrian was 75% at fault.
You would take the full value of the case
and reduce it by the pedestrian's fault, which is 75%.
In other words, the pedestrian gets 25%
of the full value of the case.
I wrote an article, there's a link there
that you can link to it, that you can click to,
and it's about that exact type of accident.
It goes into much more detail.
Is a driver at fault for hitting a pedestrian
who's passing out fliers,
like this gentleman, at the intersection?
Possibly; I wrote a separate article on that,
because these pedestrian cases
are very, very, very fact-specific.
The amount of compensation that you may get
turns on the individual facts.
But just understand that a driver may be at fault
for hitting a pedestrian who's passing out fliers.
The pedestrian may have a tremendous amount of fault
because they should not have been
in the middle of the road passing out fliers,
but there's a separate article
and video soon to come on that.
After we establish if the driver's negligence
or carelessness was the cause
of the pedestrian getting hurt,
or was the cause of the accident,
we look at did the accident cause the injury?
Now, in some cases, it's gonna be fairly straightforward,
such as the pedestrian has a fracture, a broken bone,
or has surgery or bleeding of the brain
or something of that nature.
It's easy to link up the injuries to the crash.
But when you start to deal with a shoulder tear or,
"My shoulder hurts," or shoulder pain,
the cases can become tougher,
particularly if you're dealing with older individuals
who may have acquired those injuries
over the course of their life.
So, assuming you can show that the driver's at fault,
then their fault caused the injuries,
you then look at what are the pedestrian's
out of pocket medical bills?
And generally, the pedestrian's entitled to recover
their out of pocket medical bills, but, again,
you go back to looking at the fault of the driver.
So, if the pedestrian's out of pocket medical bills
were $10,000, but the driver was only 20% at fault,
the pedestrian will only be able to recover $2,000
for those out of pocket medical bills.
20% of $10,000 is $2,000.
That is a very, very basic explanation
of out of pocket medical bills.
I wrote an article
specifically on the type of the insurances
that may pay for the pedestrian's medical bills.
Understand that it really, really can get very complex.
I'm keeping it very simple here now.
In regards to money for pain and suffering,
mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and convenience,
generally speaking, although there are exceptions,
the pedestrian needs to meet
what's called the tort threshold.
The injury the pedestrian have must meet the tort threshold
in order to even get one cent or more
for pain and suffering.
That's why I have the word "forever,"
the injury needs to be permanent.
Now, the good news is for an injured pedestrian,
that standard may seem much higher than it is.
Now, if the case gets to a jury,
which most cases don't, that standard is relatively high,
but most cases settle before a lawsuit,
which is the good news for pedestrians who are hurt.
How does a pedestrian meet this tort threshold
and what is the tort threshold?
The tort threshold is a certain limit
type of injury a pedestrian must have
in order to get one penny
for either past or future pain and suffering.
The most common injury that meets the tort threshold
is someone who is permanently injured
within a reasonable degree of medical probability,
which means a doctor needs to testify
that your injury is permanent.
If you have a scar,
permanent or significant scarring or disfigurement,
that meets the tort threshold as well.
And obviously, god forbid, you die,
that meets the tort threshold as well.
If you happen to lose your spleen, for example,
that would meet the significant and permanent loss
of important bodily function.
But just keep in mind,
you just need to meet one of these types of injuries.
Good news for out-of-state visitors hurt in Florida
is if you're from out of state
and you don't have access to PIP,
you do not have to meet the tort threshold,
have a permanent injury,
in order to get money for pain and suffering.
So, that can really increase the value
of an out-of-stater's claim,
a pedestrian from out of state, the value of their case.
If the out-of-state pedestrian does have access to PIP,
even if it's from the outer state, I think he does not;
I think he needs to have a permanent injury
in order to get money for pain and suffering,
even one penny.
You want the doctor to state in your medical records,
if true, the injury you have is permanent,
although some insurance companies will pay you
even without a doctor saying, and when I say pay you,
I mean pay you for money for pain and suffering,
even without a doctor saying that your injury is permanent.
This usually happens in claims where you have a fracture
or your medical bills are very high.
You wanna hope that liability insurance is available.
Unfortunately, in Florida, about one out of five drivers,
I believe the statistic is,
do not carry bodily injury liability insurance.
We're gonna assume right now that the driver's at fault
and the driver caused your injury.
How much money can you get?
This is going to depend on the facts of the case.
I was able to resolve, settle a case for a pedestrian
hit by a car for $325,000.
He broke the lower part of his leg.
He was hit while putting a parking ticket into his car
and a car hit him,
and we were able to settle that claim for that amount.
He had surgery, which generally drives up the value
of the damages significantly.
I also settled another case for a pedestrian for $110,000.
She was walking in a crosswalk, hit by a car.
Had she not been walking in a crosswalk,
the case may have been worth half that amount or less,
depending on the particular facts.
She fractured the bone right here in her face.
She had an orbital fracture.
Also, recently settled in 2016 a case for a pedestrian
hit by a car while not in the crosswalk.
She was right there.
She stopped to retrieve a hose,
walked this way, turned back, a car in this lane hit her.
We received $70,000.
She had some bulging discs.
They may have been preexisting before the accident.
She had a tibial plateau fracture,
which is a fracture right below the kneecap.
She also had a sacrum fracture,
which is the low end of the spine, and a shoulder injury,
shoulder impingement, and herniated discs.
Many of those injuries may have preexisted,
existed before the accident.
This is not my case, but I wanna point out
that there was a pedestrian
hit and killed by a Publix truck.
His case was dismissed.
Now, the good news is if you're a pedestrian,
your case generally does not get dismissed.
It generally makes its way to trial
if you were hit by a car.
In this case, a pedestrian was in Punta Gorda, Florida,
and was hit by a Publix truck.
Publix is one of the larger supermarkets,
actually the largest supermarket in Florida.
The estate made a claim for pain and suffering,
which is generally the largest part
of a wrongful death case,
loss of support and funeral expenses.
The problem with this case
and one of the reasons why it got dismissed,
the pedestrian was allegedly
illegally crossing the interstate.
If you're crossing I-95,
which is a major interstate in Florida,
or the Palmetto, or the 836, these are all major roads.
If you're crossing one of these roads
and you're hit by a vehicle, your case is extremely tough.
The exception is if you're hit by an 18-wheeler.
18-wheelers and tractor-trailers
are subject to so many regulations
that they still may share some fault.
Now, the pedestrian's family who sued for him,
the estate, the personal representative, had some defenses.
They said that there was skidmarks
showing that the truck driver
should've had time to avoid the accident.
Some of the things that made the case very tough
and resulted in the dismissal,
the pedestrian was let out of jail
shortly before the accident.
And although that may be an inadmissible in the case,
it's generally not a very strong fact for the pedestrian.
He was allegedly drinking alcohol in Florida.
The pedestrian likely wasn't married.
I say that because the parents were able
or at least made the claim for pain and suffering.
If a pedestrian is unmarried at the time of the accident,
the parents and the children
both have a case for pain and suffering
if the pedestrian is killed in the accident.
And again, the driver needs to be at fault.
In Florida, a pedestrian has no case
if he's hit by a car and the pedestrian is,
if his intoxication, his drunkenness in this case,
resulted in more than 50% of his fault in the accident.
Now, if you're drunk and you're walking through a crosswalk,
the car's still at fault.