Oct 24, 2013 | Car Accidents, Uncategorized
A Summerville, South Carolina woman has been charged with felony DUI after an accident that seriously injured three people. Deputies say that the woman, who was driving a 2010 
Chevrolet Suburban, crossed the center-line of the road into oncoming traffic and struck a Toyota head-on. The driver of the Toyota had to be immediately airlifted to the local hospital.
Both the passenger and the accused woman were sent to a local hospital for treatment of injuries, and officers claimed to have smelled alcohol on the suspect. It was further stated in the report that the woman was very “off balance” when she stood up; however, this may have been as a result of the accident.
In South Carolina, a Felony DUI brings with it serious penalties if the person is convicted. A suspect may be sentenced to prison for up to 25 years, and those who have a prior record of DUI convictions can expect absolutely no leniency from prosecutors or the judge.
Another problem the Felony DUI suspect may be facing is civil damages as a result of the injuries sustained. South Carolina abides by modified comparative fault with regard to personal injury/negligence claims. This means that if a person is more than 50 percent at fault in a collision or other accident, they can be held liable for the damages sustained. Here, the woman will not only face DUI charges, but likely civil damages as well.
If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower, LLP for a confidential consultation. Contact our Fort Mill, South Carolina office in Baxter Village at toll free 877-374-5999.
Oct 22, 2013 | Car Accidents, Criminal Defense, Personal Injury, Uncategorized
If you are in an automobile accident and suffered personal injuries, where you have been rear-ended by another vehicle it is likely that you believe it is the other driver’s fault. It is true in most cases that if you are rear-ended, the driver of the vehicle is at fault because the majority of the time these collisions occur as a result of following the vehicle too closely, or not paying attention to changing traffic conditions. 
However there are some exceptions to this rule and if you happen to rear-end someone you may not be at fault.
If the driver who was rear-ended was driving recklessly or intended to cause an accident that driver may be found at fault. For example, take a situation where someone rear-ended another vehicle, and the driver of the vehicle stated that he knew the other driver who was following him was too close so he slammed on his brakes with the intent that the driver would rear-end him.
In this case, the driver would have stated matter of factly that he knew that if he was rear-ended it would not be his fault. This is not the case. The driver who was rear-ended in this case was cited for reckless driving and could now be on the hook for damages to the driver who rear-ended him.
Another exception to this rule is a multi-vehicle collision. If more than two cars are involved in an accident in which a single vehicle rear-ended one vehicle and it resulted in a line of vehicles rear-ending each other than the driver who initially hit is likely to be liable.
For example, if there are two cars stopped a red light and a third vehicle does not brake in time and hits the second vehicle which in turn causes the second vehicle to hit the first, then the third vehicle will be liable to both drivers he hit.
If you are in an accident in which you are rear-ended or if you rear-ended someone else you need to learn what your options are. You may not be at fault and need to contact an attorney who has experience dealing with automobile accidents and personal injury will work hard on your case to get you what you deserve.
The attorneys of Reeves Aiken & Hightower LLP stand ready to fight for you if you have been in accident in South Carolina. We encourage you to call us toll-free at 877-374-5999 for a private, confidential consultation to discuss your options on your injuries you have sustained.
Oct 21, 2013 | Brain Injury/Head Trauma, Car Accidents, Personal Injury, Uncategorized
In the state of South Carolina, a person’s ability or right to recover after being involved in a serious accident maybe controlled and conjunctively limited by the state’s laws governing negligence claims. Specifically, South Carolina is one of the many state’s that follow the rule of “modified comparative negligence
.” The next logical question is what is “modified comparative negligence” and how does that differ from pure comparative negligence?
The answer can be broken down by percentages. Thus, under South Carolina’s “modified comparative negligence” rule, if a person is more then 50% at fault( even if it is 51%), as determined by the appropriate fact finder, then the plaintiff will be precluded from recovering anything. Under this modified system, the plaintiff will be permitted to a ” partial recovery.” Under partial recovery, the law states that any percentage of fault on the plaintiff’s part will be reduced and then deducted from the final compensation/settlement amount.
Conversely, under the pure comparative negligence rule, the degree of fault exercised by the plaintiff will not bar recovery, even if the plaintiff is found to be 90% at fault. In other words, the plaintiff can recover some percentage from the defendant regardless of the extent to which they were responsible for the accident. However, the amount of recovery maybe reduced by fault, just as in the modified comparative negligence theory explained above for partial recovery..
So, let’s put these two theories to the test and use a hypothetical to further explain. Let’s say that there was a serious car accident involving only one plaintiff, and one defendant. The facts of the accident are essentially moot, as the focus of this discussion is based upon the method of recovery. Thus, the two parties, after much deliberation, go to court and it is found that the plaintiff is 40% at fault, and the defendant is found to be 60% at fault. The settlement amount has been determined to be $100,000.
Under the modified comparative negligence theory, the plaintiff would only be entitled to recover $60,000, as they were 40% at fault and the settlement was for an even $100,000. This is not to say that the defendant will be awarded the remaining $40,000, but rather that the amount the defendant( or his insurance company) is to pay will be reduced to that $60,000 amount.
Now, let’s change the facts a bit and say that the plaintiff was found to be 60% at fault and the defendant was only 40% at fault. Under South Carolina’s rule, the plaintiff would be barred from recovering anything, because they degree of fault has crossed over that 50% threshold in the aforementioned paragraphs.
However, under the pure comparative negligence theory, the plaintiff would still be entitled to some recovery; however only for the $40,000, as they were found to be 60% at fault.
Thus, in the event that you or a loved one find yourself involved in any sort of serious accident or personal injury, contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken, and Hightower, LLP to talk to one our our experienced personal injury attorneys today toll free at (877) 374-5999
Oct 17, 2013 | Car Accidents, Personal Injury, Uncategorized
A three-vehicle collision on Interstate 26 resulted in the death of a Columbia, South Carolina woman. The South Carolina Highway Patrol reported the accident occurring when all three cars involved headed east near Piney Grove Road when an SUV spun out of control, flipping over the interstate.
Thereafter, the SUV struck another SUV. The second SUV flipped over the median, killing the 53-year-old woman driver. While the first SUV was at a stop, it was hit by a third car. The only reported casualty was that of the woman; no one else was injured. The South Carolina Highway Patrol is investigating the accident for possible negligence.
Negligence is defined as “the failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised under similar circumstances.” In South Carolina, there are four essential elements: (1) that there was a duty of care owed by the defendant; (2) the plaintiff must show that the defendant breached that duty of care; (3) the plaintiff must illustrate that the breach of such duty caused the injury to the plaintiff; and (4) plaintiff must show damages.
Different states utilize different forms of negligence systems. South Carolina uses the modified comparative system for proving negligence. This is also known as the 51 percent rule, and under this system, a plaintiff may only receive damages from a defendant if the plaintiff himself can prove that he is less than 51 percent responsible for his injuries. Therefore, the defendant is only responsible for those injuries he caused, and further, he must be more than 50 percent at fault.
If you or a loved one has been involved in a car wreck and have suffered personal injuries, you may be entitled to contribution for your injuries. Call the law offices of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower, LLP for a consultation toll free at 877-374-5999.
Oct 14, 2013 | Bus Accidents, Car Accidents, Uncategorized
Insurance companies have been criticized recently due to the fact that they have failed to pay claims even though a legitimate claim is present. When a liable party is involved in a car accident, the job of the insurance 
company is to defend the person under most circumstances. A serious problem in this industry is that insurance companies look for any reason not to pay a claim, and this is giving rise to litigation regarding “bad faith” of these companies.
A bad faith claim is present when an insurance company, that has a duty to settle for a certain policy limit, fails to pay a claim after being notified of the claim. In South Carolina, a person may make a demand to his or her insurance company to settle for the policy limits in order to resolve the case. This is also known as a “Tyger River” demand, which derives from the case Tyger River Pine Co. v. Maryland
This doctrine discusses the consequences an insurance company may face if they fail to protect the insured liable party when he or she is attempting to settle within the contract limitations Tyger Pine Co.v. Maryland Casualty Co., 170 S.C. 286.(1933)
He the insurer will be forced to provide the total amount recovered at trial, even if it exceeds the amount of insurance available under the policy limitations. This is to encourage the insurance company to settle when a reasonable offer is presented; and, to protect the insured party when they do not.
“Bad faith” is shown when four elements are proven: (1) a contract is formed; (2) the insurer refuses to pay benefits under the contract; (3) the results from the insurer’s bad faith or breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and finally, (4) damages were incurred by the insured.
An example would be if you had a loss due to a car accident, and the insurance company failed to cover you, you would have to prove these elements in order to recover for a bad faith action. However, the dilemma lies in the fact that the insurance company does not have to perform until a verdict has been entered in excess of the policy limitations. Then the insurance company waits until a trial for a reasonable settlement. This complicates the process and beckons the need for legal counsel.
If you or a loved one has been injured in a car accident it is prudent to seek an attorney to ensure that the insurance company is paying an appropriate sum given the procedural limitations. For a confidential consultation, contact the law offices Reeves, Aiken & Hightower, LLP toll-free at 877-374-5999.
Oct 10, 2013 | Car Accidents, Uncategorized
A Berkeley County wreck left one man dead and another person had to be rushed to the hospital, according to state troopers. The accident occurred on Mudville Road near Highway 176 around 9:40 p.m., when a 34-year-old, who was driving a Crown Victoria, crossed the centerline, spinning to the side, finally striking a Ford pickup.
The Crown Vic then continued into a ditch bursting into flames. Unfortunately, the driver was killed as a result of thermal burns; however, the driver of the pick-up truck was taken to the hospital with less serious injuries. Police report that the accident is still under investigation.
When you are injured in an auto accident, or any other accident in South Carolina, the insurance companies will likely pay for some of the expenses. However, sometimes, due to the circumstances surrounding the accident, funds may not be sufficient. At this point, it is important to consult with competent legal counsel about how to pay for all medical expenses, along with pain and suffering associated with a car accident.
You must establish the elements of negligence to succeed in a personal injury case. These are: (1) there was a legally recognized duty; (2) breach of that duty by the defendant; (3) causation (the defendant was the proximate and actual cause of the damages as a result of his negligence); and (4) damages (person must have suffered monetary and personal damages.
If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, contact the law offices of Reeves, Aiken & Hightower, LLP at our Fort Mill, South Carolina office. For a confidential consultation, contact us at 803-543-4444, or toll-free at 877-374-5999.
