MN Ignition Interlock Program
July 1, 2011 | Jon P. EricksonMinnesota now has an ignition interlock program for those people who lose their drivers licenses because of various levels of DWI convictions, or the loss of their driver’s license because of an over .08 blood alcohol reading or a refusal to give a test. The program is voluntary so no Judge or Driver’s License Bureau can force one into the program. The program is somewhat expensive and intrusive so it won’t work for all who find their drivers license taken away from them by state for an alcohol related matter. It can be a workable option, however, because one can get a license after only 30 days of cancellation regardless of why one lost their license. These licenses can have limitations or restrictions depending on the driver’s circumstances. In the past it could be even one year or more before one could get a license of any kind. There is a good explanation of the program at www.minnesotaignitioninterlock.org. While the website has a lot of good information to help someone who wants to look into this program, I would suggest that one should also contact his/her attorney because of how the ignition interlock interplays with other punishments and sanctions for a DUI related matter. Any person faced with this license problem needs to…
Read MoreProtecting Your Family with Car Insurance: Buyer Beware
June 7, 2011 | John T. BuchmanIn the past, I have recommended that you review your insurance coverages, particularly your homeowner’s and car insurance, and increase them when appropriate. This blog post addresses an unexpected exclusion found in some automobile policies that actually deprive you of coverage to your injured family members under certain circumstances. At least two insurance companies have an exclusion known as a “drop down” limitation that dramatically lessens the insurance coverage available to you and your family members if another family member’s driving conduct was a cause of their injuries. This is particularly relevant as we enter the summer family vacation and driving season. Two recent cases, one by the Minnesota Court of Appeals and one by the Eighth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals[1] have both enforced a “drop down” limitation that restricts claims by injured family members to the minimum amount of coverage mandated by Minnesota law, which is $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident. In both cases, family members were either killed or seriously injured and suffered losses far in excess of these minimum limits. I’m sure that neither of the parents who purchased the insurance ever envisioned that their own family members would be hurt by this unexpected limitation. In the Frey case, the 17 year-old son was driving a car…
Read MoreThe Minnesota No-Fault Act: Long Overdue Changes Needed
May 25, 2011 | John T. BuchmanMinnesota passed the “No-Fault Act” in 1974 and it became effective on January 1, 1975. The purpose of the Act was, among other things, to insure prompt payment of certain types of benefits to replace lost wages and to pay for medical care. Minn. Stat. 65B.42. One of the goals was to reduce public funds being used to help uncompensated victims of car crashes who could not afford medical care or could not work because of injuries suffered in a car crash. Another goal was to eliminate small value lawsuits and reduce the drain on judicial resources. In return, injured people gave up certain rights too, namely that they must satisfy a tort “threshold” to recover any non-economic losses from the party causing the collision. One of the main “thresholds” is whether or not the person suffered a “permanent” injury. At trial, injured people lose approximately 40-50{a0c01d20c42349884e67ff80c137866b0a9fe47aaae8f8a86a605a369ae487c3} of the time and recover nothing because a jury finds that they have not suffered a “permanent” injury. One of the no-fault benefits is reimbursement for lost wages. Initially, the legislature indicated that a person could obtain 85{a0c01d20c42349884e67ff80c137866b0a9fe47aaae8f8a86a605a369ae487c3} of their lost wages subject to a maximum of $200 per week. In 1979 the maximum wage loss amount was increased to $250 per week. Unfortunately, in the…
Read More