Archive for year: 2023

It is hard to believe that 2023 is coming to a close. The years seem to go by faster and faster with each passing turn around the sun. I would like to think that the old adage applies “time flies when you are having fun” and that is why this year has flown by so quickly.

It has been a great year. We have helped so many hard working, caring people obtain some semblance of justice this year. I say some semblance because in what we do, there is never full justice. Nobody would trade their health for money. All we can do is try and make the bad situation better by making sure they get proper treatment and that it is paid for by the insurance company. And, also by making sure they are reimbursed for what was taken from the- their health.

For me, the highlight of the years is that we have been able to help our community outside of representing Nevadans who have been hurt and injured. This year, our office provided scholarships to three amazing high school students. We are honored to have been able to help these young men and women on their continued education efforts. In addition, we formally partnered with the Clark County School District to help teachers in the classroom by providing stipends so that they can use to help further their students educational journey. Our teachers work so hard and, quite frankly, are generally underappreciated for what they do. Being the son and grandson of teacher, and knowing a number of CCSD teachers whom are close friends I am well aware of the struggles they face. We are proud to offer them our support and look forward to doing so again in 2024.

My hope is that we can continue to help our community as we grow. In 2024, we will be implementing a program where clients will be able to choose from a list of charities and once their case settles, Kristof Law Group will donate a portion of our fee to that charity. We are still in the initial discussion stages of how this will take shape, but we are excited about it!

I am proud of the work we have done. I am excited about the work we will do. Thank you to all of you who have trusted us to help you with you case. We are sincerely honored. If you are reading this I hope you never need us (or need us again) but if you do, we are here to help. Thank you and have a wonderful holiday season and upcoming new year.

One of my first blog posts was about an approximately $10,000 settlement we obtained for a client after her prior law firm (again, don’t ASK me who it was) dropped her case because it didn’t represent easy money. The firm was a large advertising firm (although dropping cases that take some extra work isn’t unique to them (but probably a lot more common by them than smaller firms).

About four months ago a doctor we work with told us about a patient of his that had just been dropped by her lawyers (again, a large advertising firm). It was a parking lot case with extremely minor damage. As I’ve mentioned before, minor property damage can be a major detriment to settlement if you don’t know what arguments to make and if your aren’t willing to put in the work.

The doctor asked if we might take a look at the case. Of course we said yes. We met with the client. She is a lovely, hard working young lady. After reviewing the facts we happily agreed to try and help her.

Fast forward five months. After obtaining the file and sending a settlement demand we were able to get her case settled for about $20,000. Is this an earth shattering settlement? No. But, it is an important settlement. Why? Because it means something to our client. It was an important case to her that her prior lawyers dropped because they knew it would take some extra elbow grease to get it done. There is a lot of lazy out there (and it just isn’t unique to lawyers). We try our best not to fall into that category.

The moral of this story- make sure whomever you hire to represent you has an excess supply of elbow grease somewhere in his office. At some point your case IS going to need it. And, as a secondary moral- bigger isn’t always necessarily better. Be a smart consumer when looking for a law firm to represent you. Ask questions and don’t be afraid to listen to your gut.

Even after 26 years of doing this I still get nervous a bit when I step into the courtroom. I worry I may stumble over my words. I worry a witness might change course and testify differently than they did in their deposition. I worry the judge may make a bad ruling that precludes or admits evidence that shouldn’t be precluded or admitted. I don’t let these worries get the best of me, but I’d be lying if I said they weren’t present.

One of the weightier things I worry about is that the jury is going to look at me and my client and blame us for the fact they have to give up time away from work or home or their normal life in general to settle a dispute they, quite honestly, might not care too much about. I mean, we wouldn’t be here if the Plaintiff didn’t file the lawsuit, right? Well, that isn’t the whole story and unfortunately the jury never gets to hear the whole story.

The law limits what I can tell jurors about how we got where we are. The jury will never know the following:

Before the lawsuit was ever filed we made a settlement demand to the Defendant’s insurance company. We gave them all of the medical records and bills, property damage photos, the traffic crash report (if there is one), and all other relevant information we may have. The demand for the insurance company to settle within the policy limits they provided to their insured (the Defendant). For example, if it is a $25,000 policy we offer to settle at or within that policy. It is only after we have tried to settle, and couldn’t, that we filed the lawsuit. We just don’t file a lawsuit immediately after the crash happens.

It is not uncommon that after the demand is made the insurance company’s first offer is below the medical bills. When this happens, the odds of being able to negotiate the claim without a lawsuit are slim. The insurance company has either (1) grossly undervalued the claim and/or (2) is daring the attorney to file suit. Admittedly the second doesn’t happen to us very often as they know not only will I file, but if the case doesn’t settle I’ll gladly go to Court and try it. Here is an example of the former, and an actual letter I sent to a Defendant when I had to serve him with the lawsuit:

My name is Michael Kristof. I represent ________. He is the individual that __________ crashed into back on January 17, 2022. I am writing this letter to you to explain why you are being sued.

Often times, when people get sued, they want to blame the Plaintiff or his attorney. They don’t understand what has happened to get to this point because their insurance company hasn’t explained it to them. I want to make sure you know how we got here.

Mr. _______ has $20,182.00 in medical bills. This isn’t surprising given the severity of the collision. I provided the medical bills and records to your insurance company- Farmers. In response, they offered to settle this claim for $19,852,64. Can you believe it? In a case where this crash is clearly your fault and which totaled out the vehicles, your insurance company offered to settle for less than the medical bills. Imagine if it was Mr. _______ who was speeding down the parking lot and slammed into you and my client’s insurance company didn’t even offer to pay the medical bills. I bet you would be upset. We are upset.

We didn’t want to sue you. But we really didn’t have a choice. Negotiating in this instance is just a waste of time given the initial offer. You will want to call your adjuster and let her know you have received this suit so that Farmers’ can provide you with a legal defense.

I am sorry it had to come to this. I imagine you are both nice people. Thank you for your time and I look forward to meeting you when I take your depositions.

After the lawsuit is settled we try and work with the insurance company’s lawyer to settle the claim. We just don’t say “see you in Court.” We sincerely try to work out a fair settlement. One that represents a reasonable value for what our client has lost.

The jury never gets to hear what the settlement negotiations were. They never get to hear that the insurance company only offered to pay the medical bills even though the law says that if this case goes to a jury the jury “will award” a fair amount for the past and future pain and suffering endured by the Plaintiff.

So, why am I posting about this? To put to rest the misconception that its always the Plaintiff’s fault a jury is summoned and good people like you are asked to sacrifice your time in the pursuit of justice.

I like to talk about my cases with my non-lawyer friends and family. I love getting their thoughts and ideas. I can’t count how many times I’ve said to myself “wow, I would never have thought of that” or “I wouldn’t have thought that was important.”

Invariably, I’ll get asked questions by these very smart non-lawyer friends and family. For instance they will ask “who got the ticket” or “what does the video from the cameras at the intersection show?” Another popular questions is “how much insurance does the person who caused this crash have?” When I tell them “you know what, the jury will never know who got the ticket or how much insurance there is” their responses are generally “no way, that can’t be right” to “wait, what?!” But, it’s true.

In Nevada, the opinion of the investigating police officer as to who is at fault is not admissible at trial. Evidence of citation is also not admissible. The Nevada Supreme Court long ago in a case called Frias v. Valle ruled that citations and officer opinions cannot be introduced as evidence. It is the jury’s job to determine fault in the courtroom, not the officers. Moreover, the officer wasn’t there to witnesses the crash and is essentially basing some of his opinions on hearsay.

I don’t completely disagree with this rule. The officer’s testimony would carry so much weight that the jury may not listen to anything else. And, officers get it wrong. They are human. That said, maybe the better route would be to let the officer testify as to who he or she found at fault, and then instruct the jury that the officer’s opinion is not binding and that the jury is to consider all of the evidence.

A big misconception is that those traffic cameras at intersections are recording. They are not. They are simply live feeds to the NDOT to allow them monitor traffic conditions. There is currently one company I am aware of that is however recording some of the footage from various cameras around town. I have used this service in the past to try and find video of crashes my clients were involved in. Unfortunately, those specific intersections weren’t being recorded or the cameras were trained in the wrong direction.

If you are a juror on a case, you will almost never hear the word insurance uttered in court. Why? Because evidence of insurance is inadmissible. Whether a person had car insurance, let alone how much in coverage, cannot be admitted into evidence. This, even though the attorney who is representing the at fault party is either an employee of the insurance company or is being paid by the insurance company, the insurance company has paid all of the costs (often times into the tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars) associated
with the litigation and the insurance company will pay any judgment that is entered.

There are exceptions to this rule but they are very rarely used. In fact, in my 26 years of practice I can’t think of a single instance where evidence of insurance was allowed.

Again, this is a rule I see the logic behind. The insurance company isn’t on trial- the Plaintiff cannot sue the Defendant’s insurance company and has to sue the Defendant. And if a jury knew there was insurance or much insurance there was that could sway its opinion on how much to enter a verdict for. That said, it is unfair for the jury to be left to believe that the individual Defendant is footing the bill for the attorney, the expert fees, other costs and eventually the verdict. If the jury believes the Defendant is going to have to pay out of pocket for all of the injuries he or she caused it may not want to value the Plaintiff’s injuries, harms, and losses at their true, full value.

So, if you are ever on a jury and don’t hear an attorney ask an police officer “so, who did you give the ticket to?” Or you don’t see video of the crash or hear a word about insurance it isn’t because the Plaintiff or his or her lawyer doesn’t want you to see it or hear about it. It’s because the law prevents it.