Archives for February 2013

Motorcycle Accident Causes – No Second Party Present

Given our firms reputation as expert motorcycle accident attorneys in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, during the riding season we get quite a few calls from potential clients telling us about various motorcycle accident causes, such as being involved in an accident with a deer. Or, perhaps even more common, is a motorcycle accident caused by roadway situations involving loose gravel, wet leaves, or a pothole. Most of these individuals are calling a motorcycle accident law firm (we focus our practice on cycle accidents only) to find out if they have a claim against anyone or anything involved in the accident when they explain what happened and that they could not directly attribute the motorcycle accident cause to another party, because nobody was present at the scene. Motorcycle … [Read more...]

Original copyrighted content by

Motorcycle Accident Trial Lawyer

Not all motorcycle personal injury attorneys are trial lawyers. Many people don't realize that this is a specialized area of law practice – trial law. With Pennsylvania motorcycle accident lawyer Lee D. Gaber, the Cycle Attorney, you get a specialist within a specialist! Not only do I specialize in motorcycle injuries, I am also an experienced trial lawyer. Why is this important? It gives you another level of expertise, that you can view as a tool. By that, I mean being a motorcycle accident trial lawyer allows me to have the opportunity to go straight to filing for a motorcycle accident lawsuit if the insurance company looks like they are unwilling to settle. This extra leverage can also mean we have an opportunity to speed up the whole process of getting you compensation for your … [Read more...]

Original copyrighted content by

Limited Tort in a Pennsylvania Motorcycle Accident

Even though the concept of “limited tort” has been in constant litigation since its inception in 1990, who is bound by the limited tort option continues to be litigated, as evidenced by the Pa Superior Court’s opinion published on July 30, 2013 in the case of McWeeney v. The Estate of Strickler. This case involved the unsettled issue of, whether a person who is named as a driver on an insurance policy, is also bound by the owner of the policy’s selection of limited tort. In this case, the fiancé of the owner of the policy was a resident of the same household and named as a driver on the policy. Therefore, the trial court reasoned that she was also a “named insured” or, as a permissive driver, an “insured” who was bound by the limited tort selection of the owner of the car. On … [Read more...]

Original copyrighted content by
Home | Site Map