Hanlon Niemann Blog | A Freehold, New Jersey Law Firm

By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq., NJ Special Needs Trust Attorney

Self-Settled Special Needs Trusts are often use when a person with disabilities receives a personal injury settlement, an inheritance, equitable distribution, alimony or child support.  However, in many instances a Self-Settled Special Needs Trust is not appropriate.  A disability lawyer must make an analysis on the onset to make this determination. 

Some of the reasons that the trust may be inappropriate are:

•   The beneficiary does not qualify. For example, the beneficiary may not be disabled or may be over age 64.
•   The beneficiary may not be receiving means-tested public benefits, such as SSI and Medicaid, and may never require such benefits in the future. Also, the amount may be so large that benefits may not be necessary.  In those situations a determination should be made whether a special needs trust is appropriate for other reasons. Perhaps a support trust would be adequate.
•   The amount of the net settlement may be too small. For net amounts under $100,000 it is usually better to seek an alternative to a standalone Self-Settled Special Needs Trust, because of the expense associated with establishing and maintaining the trust. If the net settlement is between $100,000 and $200,000, then a trust may or may not be appropriate. If an individual trustee is available then the trust cost may not be prohibitive. A pooled or community trust may be a good option.
•   It is difficult to find a professional trustee if the amount of liquid assets to be placed in the trust is less than $500,000 - $1,000,000. If a substantial percentage of the settlement is in the form of a structured settlement annuity, there will be insufficient liquid assets to interest a financial institution in serving as trustee.

If you have questions about protecting eligibility for government benefits when filing a personal injury lawsuit or near the end when settlement or verdict is a reality, contact Fredrick P. Niemann at 732-863-9900 or 888-800-7442.  He’s happy to be of assistance.

Christopher J. Hanlon, Esq., a Personal Injury Attorney

A father’s failure to remove his child from a car before it burst into flames falls outside the exercise of child-rearing philosophy which the parental-immunity doctrine is intended to protect, a state New Jersey appeals could held.

The three-judge Appellate Division panel reinstated a dismissed wrongful death suit by the boy’s mother and ordered a new trial on whether the father’s actions were negligent.

“This case simply involves a father exposing his son to the risk of injury by not removing him from the car before the fire erupted,” Judge Marie Simonelli wrote for the court.

According to the opinion, Jasford Wiggin was driving his BMW on Route 78 in Springfield on June 17, 2004, when he smelled smoke, pulled onto the shoulder and got out to inspect his car, leaving his 4-year old son, Joseph, strapped in his car seat.  The car burst into flames a moment later.

Wiggan moved to dismiss the suit by the mother.

Superior Court Judge Marianne Espinosa granted the motion, saying the decision to leave the child in the car “falls within the area of circumstances where there should e no judicial intrusion upon his decision.”  On appeal, counsel argued that the decision by the boy’s father had nothing to do with providing for Joseph’s emotional or physical needs or fostering his well-being.

The Appellate Division agreed, citing that parental immunity is “abrogated to customary child care” but not where failure to supervise rises to the level of “willful or wanton misconduct.”

“This was not a matter of customary child care, discipline or supervision.  It had no connection whatsoever to any unique philosophy of child-rearing, nor was it designed to promote Joseph’s physical, moral, emotional and intellectual growth.”  For more information, please contact Christopher J. Hanlon, Esq. or Lauren Bercik, Esq. at 732-863-9900.

When a car or truck has a collision with a bicycle, the bicycle rider usually loses, no matter who legally had the right of way. Bicycle riders should take extra care to obey the following safety tips:

Remember: Bikes Are Vehicles, Too
Legally, bicycles traveling on a road are required to be treated in the same way as any other vehicle traveling on the road would be. This means that, as a bicyclist, you must obey the same laws as other drivers do. Do not run red lights, change lanes without signaling, or commit other infractions.  If you would not do it in a car, don’t do it on a bike.

Wear a Helmet
The easiest way to protect yourself is to always wear a helmet when you ride. Some jurisdictions require all riders to wear helmets, but even where it is not required, wearing an approved helmet can significantly reduce the chance of serious head injuries in the event of an accident.

Be Visible
Because bicycles are so much smaller than cars and trucks, it is important to make sure that others using the road can see you. Make sure that your bicycle has reflectors on the front and back and even on the wheels. When riding at night, wear light-colored clothing and use a light.

Be Aware
The best safety advice is to be aware of the conditions around you and be careful when riding. Always look both ways when entering a street and stay on the correct side of the street when riding. Keep a lookout for drivers who may not be looking out for you. Like other drivers, bike riders should ride defensively.

For more information on car accident cases, click here.

There is an automobile accident every 10 seconds of every day in America, over 6 million every year. Every 13 minutes there is a death caused by a motor vehicle accident. These car accidents cause over 40,000 deaths and 3 million injuries each year. Because New Jersey’s highways are so heavily traveled, a disproportionate number of these accidents occur in our state. Medical bills, lost wages, physical incapacity, rehabilitation and future healthcare may seem insurmountable obstacles, especially when confronted with dealing with the other driver’s insurance company.

In New Jersey, when a loved one dies because of the carelessness of another, the survivors may be entitled to damages.
In New Jersey, the verdict or judgment of the court trying the case includes, but may not be limited to, damages for the following:

1.  Sorrow, mental anguish, pain and suffering which may include society, companionship, comfort, guidance, and advice of the decedent;

2.  Compensation for reasonably expected loss of (i) income of the decedent and (ii) services, protection, care and assistance provided by the decedent;

3.  Expenses for the care, treatment and hospitalization of the decedent incident to the injury resulting in death;

4.  Reasonable funeral expenses; and

5.  Punitive damages may be recovered in New Jersey for willful or wanton conduct, or such recklessness that demonstrates a conscious disregard for the safety of others.
 
You can send a confidential message to Christopher J. Hanlon right now or call at 732-863-9900 Ext. 108, about a wrongful death claim or lawsuit because of a death related accident.
 

There is a tragic story out of Virginia.  Apparently a 15 year old was riding his bicycle when a car approached him from the rear.

According to published reports, the car mosed into the oncoming lane to pass the cyclist. The young boy, however, then turned left in front of the car.

According to accounts, the young cyclist was wearing headphones as the time of the accident. Unfortunately, he died from injuries sustained in the accident.

The obvious but sad lesson is that wearing headphones while bicycling (and, for that matter, while running near traffic) is a recipe for disaster.

Some of the major disability insurance carriers will stop at nothing to keep sticking it to claimants.

Its tax time and the insurance companies are sending 1099’s to those with whom it entered settlements last year.

At least one company is telling the IRS, via the 1099’s that the settlements are taxable benefits, even if the benefit itself was not taxable! If you are getting disability benefits and you paid the premium for the policy, then any benefit you get is non-taxable. That’s straight up federal tax law.

A major company is taking the position that “yes, you are right but since this is a settlement we are going to report it to the IRS as taxable.”

Pure, outright fraud on the part of this company. The disabled insured is left paying more attorney and CPA bills to straighten out the mess…all because this major insurance company is either stupid as all get out or mean as the devil.

Finally, a state getting serious about a doctor with a history of inadequate care.

The board of medicine in Boston, Massachusetts has suspended an ob-gyn with a alleged history of serious malpractice complaints, calling her an “immediate and serious threat to public health.” Dr. Suzanne B. Rothchild’s medical license was suspended after the board reviewed nine cases that alleged inadequate care by her.  According to court records. Rothchild has been accused of medical malpractice 12 times since 1993.

In the state of West Virginia, legislation which would prohibit specific financial demands for damages in personal injury and wrongful death cases from being included by attorneys has drawn support from both trial attorneys and defense counsel.

Earlier in March, the state’s Legislature passed House Bill 4120, which would prohibit such demands. Exceptions are provided by the bill for cases when a specific amount is necessary for obtaining or preserving jurisdiction or otherwise required by an existing statute or rule. A similar law for medical malpractice cases is already in place.

West Virginia Governor received the bill after it was unanimously passed by both the House and Senate.

The president of the West Virginia Association for Justice, mentioned two lawsuits filed in 2007 which helped trigger public perception about “frivolous” suits, although both were outside of “the accepted practice of responsible attorneys.”

In one case, a judge in Washington, D.C. filed a $54 million suit against a dry cleaner for losing a pair of pants. The other was a West Virginia suit for $10 million filed against McDonald’s for putting cheese on a hamburger.

Both lawsuits received national attention but would not have attracted any attention had the attorneys filing the cases not included large, unjustified financial demands. She says that the legislation would help ensure that the evidence in the case fully supports the damages being sought.

Some attorneys are abusing the practice for the sake of publicity or attention, which is harmful to the state through the public backlash.

There is a tragic story last week out of Virginia.  Apparently a 15 year old was riding his bicycle when a car approached him from the rear.

According to published reports, the car mosed into the oncoming lane to pass the cyclist. The young boy, however, then turned left in front of the car.

According to accounts, the young cyclist was wearing headphones as the time of the accident. Unfortunately, he died from injuries sustained in the accident.

The obvious but sad lesson is that wearing headphones while bicycling (and, for that matter, while running near traffic) is a recipe for disaster.