North Carolina Auto Accident Insurance Law

Former insurance company lawyer and former claims adjuster Carl Nagle reveals insurance industry secrets and step-by-step guidelines to help motor vehicle accident victims: safely navigate the insurance claim process understand what is covered by insurance identify all parties who owe for accident losses locate all insurance policies and safely report claims collect full payment for car repairs or total loss receive medical care now with no out-of-pocket loss collect benefits from multiple insurance policies settle privately with no lawsuits or court involvement avoid insurance adjuster payment reduction tactics understand and present proper medical evidence maximize cash settlement for pain & suffering collect payment now for future medical needs collect for all lost wages & earning ability understand common traumatic injuries determine the fair value of your injury case make sure your settlement is tax free reduce & defend all claims against your settlement

Issues for 1939-Sept. 30, 1943 contain advance digest for full-text decisions currently reported in the CCH Insurance law reporting service.

In this new volume, two lawyers debate which kind of automobile insurance is the best, no-fault or tort liability. This book presents in one place all the legal, political, historical, and financial arguments about the two types of auto insurance. Under the fault system currently used by thirty-seven states, tort law provides that the party at fault in the accident pays the full damages of accident victims. Jerry J. Phillips favors this system, arguing that it allows for fair compensation to the injured and deters drivers from dangerous behavior on the road. Stephen Chippendale counters this claim with the argument that tort-law based insurance combines high cost and low benefits, and that those who truly profit from it are the lawyers representing injured clients, while their claims clog up the court system. A better solution, he proposes, would be "Auto Choice," a plan under which consumers would choose whether or not they wished to be eligible for damages from pain and suffering. With civility and respect, these two legal scholars present thoughtful and thorough arguments on both sides of the debate, giving readers a balanced view of an issue that affects nearly every American. It will be of particular value to those in the fields of law, policy, and insurance.