Most lawyers practice to make money resolving client’s issues. Why accept a case when you initially see problems….such as your client lying?

My practice collects money for Accident victims. Today we deal with the new deny & delay insurance company claims strategy. Thus many CV lawyers are reluctant to accept soft tissue/whiplash claims.

When I started practicing, accident medical bills were sent to the insurance company that would offer 3-4 times the medicals. Those days are gone.

Today $9,000 in medicals often results in a paltry $5,000 offer. Unfortunately this is not enough to pay the doctors and legal fees, and clearly there would be no money for the client. Now a $9,000 med bill, that previously resulted in a jury verdict/ settlement of $27,000, would today result in an offer or verdict of $5,000-$9,000.


Thus the attorney has to find a way to generate money for the client. This often involves begging the doctors to cut their bills. Many lawyers feel it is not worthwhile arguing with doctors to cut bills, in addition to arguing with insurance companies and or defense lawyers to put money on the case. Meanwhile, the client is unable to understand why their case is not worth more money.

Recently a local resident presented what would have been a great case, TWO MONTHS EARLIER…when it happened. To her credit she had Blue Cross and went to Eisenhower ONCE, but did not have any follow up medical treatment. She also talked to the adjuster.

If I accepted this 2 month old case and the client now starts medical treatment, I know it will be a problem. No matter what we argued to the insurance company or jury, I know that it would be a challenge to convince them that late treatment was really accident related. They would ask “Mr. Gribow, how do we know that she did not recently slip at the pool/shower or fall playing tennis and tried to collect on this old case?”

Most clients focus on the injury and not on any of the following harmful factors that can cause me to reject a case: 1) admitting liability, 2) no immediate medical treatment, 3) questionable liability, 4) low property damage, 5) prior accidents, 6) no insurance, 7) delay calling a lawyer, 8) social media showing you playing sports, while complaining of injuries and 9) client talking to the adjuster. It is not what the client told the adjuster but what the adjuster THOUGHT s/he heard.

We will never know the harmful things the client told the adjuster. The kiss of death is learning of admissions to the adjuster, during trial. Adjusters can testify what the client said, right after the accident, and BEFORE hiring a lawyer. The implication is that the client only filed and sought medical advice because of his/her lawyer.

A recent case decreased the value of whiplash cases. Today if the med bill is $100,000 and health insurance pays $90,000 and your obligation is $10,000 you can only present the $10,000, out of pocket costs, to the jury. Damages are now the victims out of pocket costs.

Small cases are now worth a fraction of what they would have garnered 10 years ago. Thus most experienced desert PI lawyers are reluctant to accept small whiplash cases.

Questions or ideas for future columns contact Dale Gribow 760- 837-7500 or

DALE GRIBOW, “Award winning attorney”

“TOP LAWYER” – Palm Springs Life-(PI/DUI) 2011-19

“TOP LAWYER”- Inland Empire Magazine Nov. ’16

PERFECT 10.0 AVVO Peer Rating



“PREEMINENT” Rating – Martindale Hubbell Legal Directory

“BEST Attorneys of America”-(“Rue” Limited to Top 100 Attorneys/state)

Legal Eagle “Best and Brightest Legal Minds” – Palm Springs Life- 6/16