Automobile & Autonomous Vehicle Liability
Automobile Vehicle Liability
Tyson & Mendes’ attorneys are experienced at trial and as counsel on general tort litigation matters, including personal injury defense in cases arising out of automobile accidents and premises liability matters. Our automobile defense work covers the spectrum, from soft tissue injuries to catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases.
We also specialize in defending “damages only” cases. These cases have included admitted liability wrongful death matters and catastrophic injury cases with multi-million dollar demands against some of the foremost plaintiff’s attorneys in the country.
In addition to the defense of insureds for several leading international insurance companies, Tyson & Mendes has directly represented numerous manufacturers, dealers, trucking companies, national automobile and trucking rental companies, and other transportation and corporate clients. We have also been involved in the investigation and defense of fraudulent automobile insurance claims.
Autonomous Vehicle Liability
Some experts predict autonomous vehicles will take over personal transportation by 2030, but the reality is they are here now, and are changing the way many industries do business. Tyson & Mendes’ Autonomous Vehicles Liability Litigation practice group offers clients deep automotive liability litigation experience and knowledge about the ever-changing regulation and legislation arising in response to more autonomous vehicles on the road.
Despite the enhanced safety features autonomous vehicles provide, they inevitably still cause damage –and personal injury lawsuits related to autonomous vehicles will increase over time. Tyson & Mendes understands the challenges and liabilities presented to insurers and manufacturers, and defends related cases in federal and state courts.
SAN FRANCISCO (April 18, 2019) – Following a 5-week jury trial, a San Francisco County jury on April 18, 2019, found an airport shuttle service and one of its drivers not liable for injuries the plaintiff alleged he suffered...
RIVERSIDE, Calif. (April 17, 2019) – Following a three-week trial, a San Bernardino County jury on April 10, 2019, found Chino Hills Ford not liable for a serious car accident which allegedly caused seizures to a child. Tyson & Mendes LLP attorneys Kristi Blackwell and Christopher Schon represented Chino Hills Ford and secured a full defense verdict in which the injured plaintiff sought more than $7.4 million in damages.
SAN DIEGO (July 10, 2018) – Continuing its accelerated growth over the last two years, civil defense firm Tyson & Mendes LLP has opened its third office in San Diego, marking its 10th office across the country. The new office, located at 4435 Eastgate Mall, Suite 400 in the UTC area, will focus primarily on the firm’s Automobile Liability Litigation practice, which has increased in size exponentially in the last two years.
San Diego Union Tribune – August 29, 2011
Six years ago, a meat truck driving down an Encinitas road made an illegal U-turn and slammed into a car driven by Rebecca Howell, a former professional surfer and ex-teacher. The fallout from that crash left Howell with numerous injuries — and also led to a lawsuit that became one of the most closely watched cases among insurance companies and plaintiffs lawyers in years. At stake in the litigation: Can an accident victim recover the full amount of medical costs that a hospital billed or only the smaller amount that the victim’s insurance carrier actually paid to the hospital to satisfy the bill?
The Arizona Court of Appeals found using a cell phone while driving at the time of an accident resulting in a wrongful death or severe injuries can support a claim for punitive damages. Plaintiffs must establish evidence of cell phone use and other evidence the driver was “consciously pursuing a course of conduct knowing it creates a substantial risk of significant harm to others.”
a recent ruling out of Nevada involving a case in which a plaintiff alleged bad faith, a judge opined a bad faith allegation did not survive Rule 12(b)(6) scrutiny. Rule 12(b)(6) pertains to a pre-trial motion for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” In Sahinov v. Geico Advantage Ins. Co., the court deemed it “difficult for the court to sufficiently analyze whether one party was acting in bad faith” based on the details provided.
Arizona is a popular destination for out of state residents to enjoy the beauty and warmth the state has to offer. We especially see an increase in visitors from October to May. Many of these individuals stay in Arizona for a period of multiple months.
Unfortunately, some experience an auto accident during their stay in Arizona. Typically, the out of state resident maintains an auto insurance policy issued in their home state. As a part of their policy, they may have personal insurance protection (“PIP”) or medical payments coverage. Under these coverages, the carrier will likely pay for the initial medical expenses or other losses that may qualify due to the accident. Also, the visitor may settle with the other driver involved, and depending on the damages, file an uninsured (“UM”) or underinsured motorist claim (“UIM”).