Category: Uncategorized


Johnson & Johnson Ordered to pay over: $110 Million to Victim

The verdict in state court in St. Louis was the largest so far to arise out of about 2,400 lawsuits accusing J&J of not adequately warning consumers about the cancer risks of talc-based products, including its well-known Johnson’s Baby Powder.

Many of those lawsuits are pending in St. Louis, where the J&J has faced four prior trials, three of which resulted in $197 million verdicts against J&J and a talc supplier.

Thursday’s verdict came in a lawsuit against J&J and talc supplier Imerys Talc by Lois Slemp, a resident of Virginia who is currently undergoing chemotherapy after her ovarian cancer initially diagnosed in 2012 returned and spread to her liver.

Slemp claimed she developed cancer after four decades of using talc-containing products produced by J&J, including J&J’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower Powder.

The jury awarded $5.4 million in compensatory damages and said J&J was 99 percent at fault while Imerys was just 1 percent. It awarded punitive damages of $105 million against J&J and $50,000 against Imerys.

Reuters watched the verdict through Courtroom View Network, which broadcast it online.

“Once again we’ve shown that these companies ignored the scientific evidence and continue to deny their responsibilities to the women of America,” Ted Meadows, a lawyer for Slemp and other plaintiffs, said in a statement.

J&J in a statement said it sympathized with women impacted by ovarian cancer but planned to appeal.

“We are preparing for additional trials this year and we continue to defend the safety of Johnson’s Baby Powder,” J&J said.

The verdict came after J&J secured its first trial win in the Missouri litigation, when a jury in March sided with the company in a lawsuit by a Tennessee woman who said she developed cancer after using Baby Powder.

That verdict broke a three-trial winning streak by plaintiffs that began with a verdict in February 2016 in which a jury awarded $72 million to the family of a woman who died from ovarian cancer.

In May 2016, another jury awarded $55 million to a woman who said J&J’s talc-powder products caused her to develop cancer. A third jury hit J&J and Imerys with a $70 million verdict in October.

 

 

Article published originally by CBS news. Read more Here

Home Explosion in Firestone, Colorado

Fire investigators found a 1-inch diameter black plastic pipeline running from an Anadarko Petroleum well near the house that had been cut when a tank battery was moved before the Oak Meadows subdivision was built, Poszywak said.

That pipeline leaked the gas from a point 6 feet from the southeast corner of the house at 6312 Twilight Ave. in Firestone. Investigators said they found the gas valve at the Anadarko well in the “on” position. Poszywak said leaking gas “saturated the soil and migrated into the French drains of the home.”

Soon after the firefighters released their report Tuesday, Gov. John Hickenlooper ordered oil and gas companies statewide to inspect and pressure-test oil and gas flowlines within 1,000 feet of occupied buildings.

Hickenlooper said companies must make sure flowlines not in use are properly marked and capped, and that any abandoned flowline cut off underground is sealed.

Frederick investigators found “prerefined gas” — gas that had not been odorized for safety — in the basement sump pit and French drains, Poszywak said. “Those inside the home would not have smelled it.”

The gas was a volatile mix of methane and propane, he said. It “found an ignition source inside the home. It erupted into a sudden and violent explosion” that killed homeowner Mark Martinez and his brother-in-law Joey Irwin and critically injured Martinez’s wife, Erin.

Family members have said Martinez and Irwin were working on a water heater in the basement of the house.

The Anadarko Petroleum oil and gas well sits 178 feet from the house that burned and collapsed in the fiery explosion April 17. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission regulators announced last week they were supporting the local firefighters’ investigation, and Anadarko officials said they voluntarily were shutting down 3,000 of their older, vertical oil and gas wells in northeastern Colorado as a precaution.

“It was the pipeline rather than the wellhead that caused the buildup related to the explosion,” Poszywak said.

Anadarko had left the well dormant in 2016 and restarted it in January. Anadarko operators may not have pressure-tested underground flow lines to detect leaks, one of many issues the COGCC regulators said they would review.

COGCC chief Matt Lepore said Tuesday afternoon that the commission will consider adopting new rules to require pressure testing for smaller flow pipelines. He added that rules regarding mapping of pipelines throughout the state also will be reviewed as well as other matters.

The house explosion on Twilight Avenue has re-ignited concerns about oil and gas industry operations close to where people live along Colorado’s booming Front Range.

While the COGCC requires companies drilling new oil and gas wells to stay 500 feet from homes (unless companies make deals with landowners and get special permission), state officials leave it to local governments to determine how close to industry facilities new houses can be built.

Firestone’s municipal code allows new house construction as close as 150 feet to existing oil and gas facilities.

“We do not have any definitive answer for what happened,” Oak Meadows subdivision builder Century Communities spokesman Andy Boian said. “We are 100 percent committed to finding out what happened.”

State Sen. Matt Jones, a Boulder County Democrat, on Tuesday warned of “a recipe for disaster that could cause people to get hurt.”

“As more information has come to light, it has become clearer that these oil wells, pipes, and tanks are simply too dangerous to be in close proximity to homes, businesses, and schools,” Jones said. “We need to take steps to ensure a tragedy like this doesn’t happen again.”

The Sierra Club is urging state leaders to stop permitting new oil and gas operations until the COGCC overhauls its current process to make sure public health and safety and the environment are protected.

Pointing to the recent Colorado Court of Appeals ruling that oil and gas production can only be done if it does not hurt people and the environment, Sierra Club “Beyond Oil and Gas” campaign director Harv Teitelbaum said COGCC regulators too often waive rules and approve projects “in service of drilling operator convenience and economic expediency

“As a result of these loopholes and rubber-stamped waivers, homeowners and prospective buyers in newer housing developments are not adequately informed of the potentially fatal risks they face,” he said.

Sierra Club members “are very concerned about this, and suspect that this is not an isolated situation,” Teitelbaum said. “Even if not right on top, corrosion in nearby lines, combined with various pathways for gas migration, present a serious, ongoing, widespread risk. … All operators in Colorado should be required to immediately suspend operations at similar wells, fully inspect and report on those wells — not on a voluntary basis — with monitoring systems put in place to alert authorities to any leaks. Long-term, this problem will only get worse as corrosion, geologic action and age affect the integrity of all old wells.”

Article contents belong to it’s respective writers at the Denver Post. To read more, click Here

Talcum Powder Litigation Update

In early February 2017, our partners returned to St. Louis to begin their fourth talcum powder trial, which was a “Defense pick.”

Our Plaintiff in the case was Nora Daniels, who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in May 2013 after having used Johnson and Johnson talcum powder products for more than 30 years. On March 3rd, 2017, after a multi-week trial, the jury returned a Defense verdict for both Johnson & Johnson and Imerys Talc America, the manufacturer that supplies talc to Johnson & Johnson. This was the first time a jury decided in favor of Johnson & Johnson.

As you may recall, three previous St. Louis juries returned verdicts for the Plaintiff and awarded damages totaling nearly $200 million. While disappointed with the outcome in this case, we continue to evaluate and file cases on behalf of women who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer after using Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder and/or Shower to Shower products. We feel badly for Ms. Daniels and know what she has gone through.

Four additional talc trials are currently set to take place in St. Louis later this year. Additional trials are scheduled in Washington, D.C and California later this year. Our partners will return to St. Louis to begin our fifth St. Louis talcum powder trial on April 10th. Our Plaintiff in this case is a 61 year old Virginia resident, who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in August 2012 after using Johnson & Johnson talcum powder products for more than 40 years. This trial, like the prior trial, is also a “defense pick”. We also have another talc trial in St. Louis scheduled for June 2017. Our lawyers look forward to trying both of these cases.

If you have any questions regarding the Talc litigation, or if you would like us to review a potential claim, contact Jon Boesen, President and Founder of Boesen Law at 303-999-9999 or 720-266-6700. You may also email us at [email protected]

J&J Hid Talc Baby Powder Cancer Risks

An Article by Law360, Los Angeles (October 4, 2016, 6:59 PM EDT) — A woman who developed ovarian cancer after using Johnson & Johnson talc-based baby powder on her genitals urged a Missouri jury Tuesday to find J&J liable for her ailment, saying the company has known for years about the product’s cancer link but would not warn consumers.

During opening arguments in St. Louis, Deborah Giannecchini’s attorney R. Allen Smith Jr. of The Smith Law Firm said that J&J’s internal documents showed that the company had written out “a question and answer” to prepare for questions from plaintiffs attorneys, and that another document suggested the company would be compared to the cigarette industry if it did not warn customers. Smith said J&J had been urged since at least 1982 to use warning labels.

But it has not, leading to his client Giannecchini’s Stage 4 ovarian cancer and complications from her treatment and a greatly reduced life expectancy, Smith told jurors.

“She has literally had her spleen removed, part of her stomach removed, part of her colon removed, all of her ovaries, uterus. She has literally had basically the lower half of her body removed,” Smith said. “She said if there would have been a warning on the bottle to not use this on the genital area, she would not have done it and we might not be here.”

J&J’s attorney David E. Dukes of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, meanwhile, argued that there is no solid link between talc and ovarian cancer.

He said that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were among trusted medical institutions that looked for a potential link but found none.

“No one knows what causes ovarian cancer,” Dukes said.

Talc company Imerys Talc America Inc., also a defendant, seconded J&J’s contention that the mineral is not linked to cancer. Imerys’ attorney Nancy Erfle of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP added that her client does not market the baby powder product but merely provides the raw materials used to make it.

Giannecchini’s trial follows massive losses by J&J in two similar cases this year.

In February, a Missouri jury awarded $72 million to the estate of Jacqueline Fox, who died of ovarian cancer after using the body powder for decades. It was reportedly the first time the company has been ordered to pay damages over the link between cancer and the talc used in its products.

The Fox verdict included $10 million in compensatory damages and $62 million in punitive damages.

In another case in May, a Missouri jury slammed the company with a $55 million verdict in a suit brought by Gloria Ristesund.

For more coverage of Giannecchini’s trial, visit Courtroom View Network.

Arguing for Giannecchini is R. Allen Smith Jr. of The Smith Law Firm.

Arguing for Johnson & Johnson is David E. Dukes of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP. Arguing for Imerys is Nancy Erfle of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP.

The case is Giannecchini v. Johnson & Johnson et al., case number 1422-CC09012-01, in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court of the State of Missouri.

Third J&J Hip Implant Bellwether Delivers $1B Verdict

A Texas federal jury on Thursday found Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. unit liable for more than $1.04 billion in a six-plaintiff bellwether trial targeting metal-shedding artificial hips that are part of its Pinnacle line, dwarfing the $150 million verdict J&J is on the hook for after a previous bellwether.

After a two-month trial that closed Nov. 30, jurors deliberated for less than a day before finding J&J and DePuy had negligently designed the hip implant, failed to warn surgeons about dangerous conditions related to the implant and concealed the implant’s risks. The verdict includes between $4 million and $6 million per plaintiff in damages for physical injuries and pain and suffering, $1 million each to four spouses for loss of consortium and more than $504 million against each of DePuy and J&J in punitive damages, after the jury found the companies had acted with malice or fraud.

DePuy and J&J were each found liable for negligent design defect, negligent failure to warn, strict liability failure to warn, failure to recall, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation and fraudulent concealment. J&J was also found liable for aiding and abetting DePuy in each of the seven causes of action. The jury found J&J did not conspire with DePuy on the design defect claim, but did find J&J liable for conspiracy on the other six claims.

Because the six plaintiffs are from California, they are not [would not have been] subject to the same punitive damages cap that slashed by more than two-thirds the $502 million verdictfrom the second bellwether trial, which involved Texas plaintiffs. J&J previously won the first bellwether trial, which involved one plaintiff from Montana.

Before the third bellwether got underway, J&J complained it was being hit with unfair pretrial rulings, and during the trial, J&J continued to raise objections to perceived advantages for the plaintiffs. The case involved six plaintiffs from California, who each had to undergo “revision surgeries” after being fitted with metal-on-metal artificial hip systems made by DePuy, known as the Pinnacle hip system’s Ultamet variety.

At the MDL’s heart are allegations that friction between the device’s metal socket and metal ball head rubs away billions of microscopic particles with every step, polluting the bloodstream and surrounding tissue with “wear debris” over time. The plaintiffs alleged J&J knew the device was riskier than others available but still pushed it aggressively, even paying kickbacks to amenable surgeons.

In closing arguments, plaintiffs’ lawyer Mark Lanier of The Lanier Law Firm had asked the jury to impose a stiff enough penalty on Johnson & Johnson that the company would change its behavior with future medical devices. He had suggested a $500 million punitive award would hardly be felt by a company worth $72 billion.

J&J maintains it acted appropriately and responsibly in the development, testing and marketing of the Ultamet product. During its opening, the company questioned whether the patients might have had hypersensitive responses to the implants, and suggested the devices were wrongly positioned in their bodies because of doctor error, which it said would lead to the excessive wear.

In a measured closing argument, defense lawyer Steve Quattlebaum of Quattlebaum Grooms Tull & Burrow PLLC had walked jurors through the 96-page, 33-question jury charge, pointing out what he said were holes in the plaintiffs’ case and a failure to present evidence supporting the plaintiffs’ claims.

From the outset, J&J had raised complaints about how the trial was conducted. It launched a mistrial motion immediately after the plaintiffs’ opening statement, arguing plaintiffs’ lawyer Mark Lanier had improperly referred to illegal bribes and kickbacks — the subject of a 2007 deferred-prosecution agreement. Days later, it sought a mistrial after the introduction of what it said were misleading ads that ran in orthopedic journals, and filed another mistrial motion aimed at the suggestion by plaintiffs its metal-on-metal implants could increase patients’ risk of cancer and other systemic injuries.

J&J also complained that it was on the losing end of improper pretrial rulings, saying MDL decisions had undermined the chances for a fair or meaningful result.

It argued Texas federal court was the improper jurisdiction for a trial involving California plaintiffs, said the consolidation of six plaintiffs into one trial prejudiced its ability to present its defense and argued it had wrongly been shut out of the process of selecting plaintiffs for the trial. The company also said the trial court unfairly allowed witnesses to testify remotelywhen no special circumstances demanded it, even making an ultimately unsuccessful request to the Fifth Circuit to stop the practice.

The next bellwether is set to begin in September 2017, with the parties preparing for 10 plaintiffs all from New York. J&J has objected to proceeding with any more trials in the MDL until the appeals from the second bellwether trial have been resolved, and argues the Texas federal court lacks jurisdiction over out-of-state residents.

The patients are represented by W. Mark Lanier of The Lanier Law Firm, Richard Arsenault of Neblett Beard & Arsenault, Jayne Conroy of Simmons Hanly Conroy LLC and Khaldoun Baghdadi of Walkup Melodia Kelly & Schoenberger, among others.

DePuy and Johnson & Johnson are represented by Steve Quattlebaum of Quattlebaum Grooms Tull & Burrow PLLC, John Anderson of Stoel Rives LLP, Dawn Estes of Estes Thorne & Carr, Michael Powell and Seth Roberts of Locke Lord LLP and Stephen J. Harburg, John H. Beisner, Jessica Davidson Miller and Geoffrey M. Wyatt of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP.

The MDL is In re: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. Pinnacle Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, case number 3:11-md-02244, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

 

CREDIT: Law360, Dallas (December 1, 2016, 5:14 PM EST) —

Swedish Medical Hospital Patients Possibly Exposed to HIV, Hep B, and Hep C

Denver, Colorado – It is believed that about 2,900 patients that underwent surgery at Swedish Medical Center from August 17th, 2015 to January 22nd, 2016 are receiving notices that they should undergo emergency testing for HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C.

This notice stems from a current investigation into a former surgical technician that worked at Swedish Medical Center. The technician has not been publicly identified.

Swedish Medical Center has released a statement that there is “No evidence of any patient exposure” however, they are offering free testing to all patients who underwent surgery at Swedish at any of the locations where the ex-employee worked, including days that the employee was not on the schedule or in the facility. Swedish Medical Center’s CEO “Richard A. Hammett states “We deeply regret that one of our former employees may have put patients at risk, and are sorry for any uncertainty or anxiety this may cause.”

Hepatitis B, also known as HBV or Hep B affects the liver and can cause acute and/or chronic illness. It can also cause yellowing of the eyes, abdominal pain, and dark urine. Children may not experience symptoms. Chronic cases of Hep B can lead to liver failure, cancer, or scarring. In extreme cases, a liver transplant may be necessary, as sourced by The World Health Organization.

Hepatitis C, also known as HCV, causes both acute and chronic infection of the liver. It can be a mild illness but also a serious lifelong illness. Many people affected by Hep C will likely develop liver cirrhosis or liver cancer. There is currently no vaccine for Hep C. Symptoms of Hep C are difficult to discern at first because the infection incubates anywhere from 2 week to 6 months. Prominent symptoms include fever, fatigue, decreased appetite, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, dark urine, grey colored stool, joint pain, and jaundice. You can learn more through The World Health Organization.

HIV – Human immunodeficiency virus is a non-curable virus that attacks the body’s natural defense against illness. The virus destroys a type of white blood cell called a T-helper cell and makes copies inside of the. There are several strains of HIV and an infected person may carry several different strains. HIV can take around 10 to 15 years for AIDS to develop. HIV symptoms include flu-like symptoms such as fever, sore throat, and fatigue. Once HIV develops into AIDS, symptoms include weight loss, fever or night sweats, fatigue, and recurrent infections. A sufferer may also experience pain the the abdomen, while swallowing, a dry cough, nausea, diarrhea, ulcers in the mouth or a white tongue, sores in the groin area and swelling. Learn More about HIV Here.

If you underwent surgery at Swedish Medical Center, you are welcomed to get a free blood test for HIV, Hep B, and Hep C at the expense of Swedish Medical Center.

Steep Fines for Breaking the I-70 Chain Law

If you plan on traveling through Interstate 70 this winter season, CDOT will be enforcing traction and passenger vehicle chain laws.

Drivers traveling through I-70 will be required to have snow tires, tires made for mud/snow or a four-wheel drive vehicle. The driver must also have the minimum of one-eight inch tread. You may face steep fines for breaking the I-70 chain law, also known as a code 16.

The chain law (and the steep fines) applies to all vehicles, semi-trucks and sedans alike. Once a passenger vehicle chain or traction action is in effect all cars traveling on Interstate 70 will be required to have chains or an alternative traction device on their tires.

CDOT will not be proactively monitoring vehicles for proper equipment, however Colorado State Patrol may issue a ticket when at the scene of either an accident, road block, or vehicle hazard. In order to not block the I-70 corridor you may move your vehicle to away from the roadway. Major Steve Garcia with The Colorado State Patrol says that “Law enforcement and insurance companies will not penalize motorists for moving their vehicle off the roadway after a crash. Moving your crash is the simplest and safest way to keep traffic flowing along one of the most traveled corridors in the state.

In a last ditch effort to ease traffic along the I-70 corridor, CDOT will be opening the new I-70 Mountain Express Lane. This is a 13 mile toll lane that extends from Empire to Idaho Springs. It will be open only during peak travel times. This new toll lane can save drivers up to 30 minutes. All Drivers must pay to use the toll lane.
Boesen Law wishes you an awesome winter season. Stay safe on I-70 and don’t face steep fines for breaking the I-70 chain law!

Colorado Hit and Run Accidents

Every month three people will die when involved in a hit-and-run accident in Colorado.

At least one person is hurt in a hit-and-run accident every day. 1 out of 5 drivers leave the scene of an accident in Colorado. What happens when the driver who hurt you or your loved one leaves the scene of an accident?

The hit and run attorneys at Boesen Law have seen and handled a number of cases where someone was injured by a person who’s fled the scene. If this is the case, call the police immediately. The DMV suggests getting as much information about the car as possible such as:

  • Model
  • Make/Color
  • License Plate Number

The DMV also advises to look for any possible witnesses to the accident. Take down their information such as name and phone number. You should also note the date/time, Location, and injuries/damage you sustained at the scene. If possible, take photographs of yourself, your property, and the scene.

Although a driver may have left the scene, you could be protected through insurance. If you have purchased what is known as UM/UIM insurance or Medpay, you may be able to seek medical care and treatment through your auto insurance policy. To learn more about UM/UIM and Medpay Insurance Click Here

If through the course of police investigation the driver is found and is found at fault they will be held responsible for damages related to the accident. Speaking with a hit and run attorney at Boesen Law will provide you with valuable legal recourse. The attorney will be able to negotiate on your behalf for a settlement that covers medical bills, lost wages, emotional distress, and permanent disfigurement.

It is important to speak with a hit and run attorney in Colorado to fully understand what you are entitled to. Please keep in mind that a statute of limitations applies to hit and run accidents in Colorado.

Winter Driving Tips

A report from NOAA claims there is currently a 95% chance that a powerful El Nino storm will impact us throughout the winter 2015-2016 and will gradually diminish through spring 2016.

We’d like to share some Winter Driving Tips and Tricks for what Meteorologists across Colorado are predicting to be a heavier-than-normal snow season.

  1. Make sure you have a solid insurance policy. You may want to consider purchasing UM/UIM insurance. If you aren’t sure what UM/UIM insurance is, click here for more information.
  1. Be prepared in case of an emergency. This includes having a winter safety kit in your car. You should also have something to write with. At Boesen Law, we recommend carrying our “Auto Accident Kit” in your glove box. Click Here for your free printable copy.
  1. Winterize your automobile. Edmunds.com recommends some of the following tips:
  1. Get snow tires for more cautious driving
  2. Check your tire pressure
  3. Maintain/Replace windshield wipers
  4. Upgrade windshield wiper fluid to one with de-icing components
  5. Check your car battery. The cold can deplete the power up to 50%
  6. Make sure Antifreeze is 50% water and 50% coolant
  7. Ensure heating and defrost systems are working correctly
  1. Practice cautious driving. You should keep a safe distance between cars in winter conditions. Keeping a safe distance between yourself and other cars may prevent sudden braking which can cause an accident. Another safety tip is to drive at a steady pace and avoid sudden speed increases. Winter weather can cause black ice which is nearly impossible to detect but by going at a cautious speed, you may avoid causing an accident.

Should you be involved in an accident during winter weather, you may experience difficulty receiving help through emergency services due to an “Accident Alert”. During an Accident Alert, weather conditions can cause a large volume of accidents. According to Colorado.gov, Troopers or Police Officers will only respond if the following conditions exist:

  1. Vehicles are disabled due to damage
  2. Accident involves a fatality or an injury requiring medical attention
  3. Alcohol and or drugs are involved
  4. Accident is an alleged hit and run
  5. There is damage to property, other than wildlife (example – highway sign, traffic sign)
  6. Any property damage accident in which the reporting party is not or has not had contact with the other driver(s)

If the accident doesn’t meet the above guidelines you must exchange information with the other driver such as their full name, driver’s license number, insurance policy information, and their phone number. Document photos of the scene, your car, and the other driver’s car.

It’s also highly recommended you file an accident report online or at a local police station where the accident occurred. You may also need to call your own Auto Insurance Company to notify them of the accident.

Lastly, you should also seek a physician’s medical evaluation after any crash. There are many times when someone has been injured in a crash and doesn’t feel pain until down the road. An evaluation from a physician can provide you with critical documentation in the unfortunate circumstance that you are injured and need legal assistance.

For any questions about these Winter Driving Tips or to speak to a Colorado Snow Accident Lawyer at Boesen Law, call us at 303-999-9999 or email us at [email protected]. Remember, the consultation is always free.

The Importance of Car Insurance

UM/UIM AND Med Pay

When buying car insurance many people are concerned with saving money. Insurance companies advertising campaigns are based on how much money you can save if you switch.

But, are you really saving if you pay less for your car insurance? In Colorado drivers are only required to carry $25,000 per person bodily injuries. This amount barely covers the cost of an ambulance ride and emergency room hospital visit. It leaves little, if anything, to compensate a person injured through no fault of their own for medical expenses, treatment, lost wages or pain and suffering.

UM/UIM insurance coverage, known as Uninsured/Underinsured coverage, fills in the gap if the negligent driver who caused the accident does not have any insurance or not enough insurance to compensate the innocent injured parties. If you or your passengers are injured and require medical care and treatment UM/UIM can be invaluable. It is worth its cost in protection. Along with medical payment coverage, it can make a big difference in the medical care and treatment available.

UM/UIM will provide protection and coverage if you are hurt by a hit and run driver. Hit and run drivers are considered uninsured motorists and UM/UIM coverage will apply. Without this additional coverage, you may be responsible for all payments, medical and property damage.

Medical Payments, referred to as ‘med-pay’ may be the best spent dollars of your insurance policy. It is relatively inexpensive and provides for the most important matter, yours and your passengers health. It can make a big difference to your recovery by being able to obtain all the medical care and treatment necessary to heal from your injuries.

In Colorado insurance companies are required to provide a minimum of $5,000.00 medical payment coverage. An insured could choose to deny this coverage; it must be done in writing. This emphasizes the importance of medical payment insurance coverage. Be sure to discuss with your agent the cost of increasing the medical payment coverage to $25,000 or even $100,000 per person for each accident. A serious injury could cost in excess of these amounts quite easily.

Protect yourself, your family and friends by having sufficient amounts of UM/UIM and Med-Pay Insurance Coverages.

Remember, if you or anyone you know is injured through no fault of their own, call us, we are available to help you through a very difficult ordeal. 

4100 E Mississippi Ave, Denver, CO 80246
Tel: (303) 999-9999
Toll Free:(800) 964-1911