About Video Surveillance Equipment

Video surveillance equipment offers a behavior-based risk reduction solution that predicts and prevents actual risky driving behaviors likely to cause collisions. The system combines sight and sound, expert analysis, and driver coaching.

A video event recorder is mounted behind the rearview mirror. It captures sights and sounds inside and outside the vehicle. Trigger forces such as hard braking, swerving, sudden acceleration, and collision cause the recorder to save the critical 10 seconds immediately before and after the negative driving event. The events are then analyzed and used in driver coaching programs to improve driving behavior and reduce driver risk.

Driving behaviors that can be tracked:

• violations of traffic laws
• violations of defensive driving principles
• aggressive driving
• violations of company policy

Initially, employees felt that the drive cams would be an invasion of privacy. Once they realized that the cameras were activated only by their driving behavior, not by management curiosity, the system has been accepted. Drivers can also manually activate the equipment to record negative driving behaviors of others.

Studies show that unsafe driving habits are the cause of most car or truck accidents. Statistics show that video surveillance equipment encourages drivers to improve their driving habits, reducing number of accidents. This saves lives.

This information is provided as a service of TSR Injury Law, a Minnesota Personal Injury Law Firm serving Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the state of Minnesota. If we can be of assistance, call 612-362-0000.

Name of Product: Graco’s Passage™, Alano™, and Spree™ Strollers and Travel Systems

Number of Units: About 1.5 million

Manufacturer: Graco Children’s Products Inc., of Atlanta, Georgia

Hazard: The hinges on the stroller’s canopy pose a fingertip amputation and laceration hazard to children when the canopy is opening or closing.

Reported Injuries: Graco has received seven reports of children grabbing the stroller’s canopy hinge mechanism while the canopy was being opened or closed, resulting in five fingertip amputations and two fingertip lacerations.

Description: This recall involves Graco Passage™, Alano™ and Spree™ Strollers and Travel Systems manufactured between October 2004 and February 2008. For the model numbers and specific hinge mechanisms visit the cpsc.

Graco manufactured two styles of hinge mechanisms for these stroller models. Only strollers or travel systems with a plastic, jointed hinge mechanism that has indented canopy positioning notches are included in this recall. The model number and manufacture date are stamped on the lower inside portion of the rear frame, above the rear wheels.

Retailers Who Sold Strollers: AAFES, Burlington Coat Factory, Babies-R-Us, Toys-R-Us, Kmart, Fred Meyer, Meijers, Navy Exchange, Sears, Target, Walmart, and other retailers nationwide. The strollers retailed for between $80 and $90 for the strollers and between $150 and $200 for the travel systems.

Consumer Contact: For additional information, consumers may contact Graco at (800) 345-4109 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, or visit their web site at www.gracobaby.com.

This information is provided as a service of TSR Injury Law. If your child has been injured by a defective stroller, it is vital to seek legal advice before you sign away your rights. You may be able to obtain compensation for damages and disfigurement. Our Minnesota Product Liability Lawyers have established a reputation for success in the area of product liability litigation. We have recovered millions on behalf of our clients. Contact us at 612-362-0000.

There are many things that can go wrong to cause a semi truck accident. If you have been in an accident with a semi truck, it is important that you protect yourself by hiring an experienced lawyer to handle the investigation. There is extensive evidence that must be preserved, analyzed, and compiled into a comprehensive, compelling case.

Theories of Fault in a Semi Truck Accident
These are areas that must be investigated in order to establish fault and prove liability.

1. Driver negligence – Many things can fall under the category of negligence including, bad driving, cell phone usage while driving, driving while texting, inattentive behavior (eating, drinking, changing music, etc.).
2. Equipment violations – Drivers are responsible for checking all of the equipment. Equipment includes brakes to the tractor, brakes to the trailer, parking brakes, steering devices, lighting devices, tires, horn, windshield wipers, rear vision mirrors, and coupling devices. Emergency medical equipment is also required.
   • Bad brakes – There are different types of braking systems and equipment. Drivers are to know their brakes systems; how to use them, inspect them, and adjust them. Out-of-adjustment brakes is the most common infraction cited at roadside inspections.
   • DOT bumpers – The DOT bumper is the bar you see on the back of the trailer that keeps the car from going under the trailer. Rear-impact guards and underride protection bars are required.
   • Failure to secure the load – Generally, it is the driver’s responsibility to properly distribute the weight and secure the load. Driver’s are also responsible for checking the load periodically.
3. Negligent hiring – If a company does not take the time to thoroughly check driver’s credentials, that is negligence. It is a major cause for road accidents involving semi-trucks.
   • Employers must have a driver qualification file that includes:
     • Medical information
     • References
     • Drivers license information
     • Driving records
     • Drug tests
4. Over hours – Drivers have specific rules regarding how many hours they can drive. There are many risks that accompany driver fatigue. There are many ways to verify hours. It takes prompt and diligent investigation.
   • Log books – verify the hours worked
   • Receipts show where they got gas
   • Put them together and see if they match
5. Underride/conspicuity – Guards / bumpers have to meet dimensional specifications as well as energy-absorption requirements.
   • Underside is a crash when the vehicle is not seen, usually at night when turning, and a vehicle drives under the side of the trailer.
   • Underside crashes are usually catastrophic.
   • Trailers and trucks are required to have conspicuity striping, reflective tape, to make them light up when headlights hit them.

The following video shows what a difference reflective tape makes.

Additional Resources:

• Federal regulations
• Safer System Organizations
• The Association of Plaintiff Interstate Trucking Lawyers of America

They claim that in certain areas (cities, counties, or judicial districts) the entire justice system for civil cases is a Hellhole® and biased against the defendants because of the rulings of one or two judges they deem “stray from the law.” Do they even consider how many law-abiding, upstanding, compassionate, dedicated legal professionals they are lumping together and labeling as being less than ethical?

After their initial list of six Hellholes®, there is a list of five areas of the United States to watch — they may descend into hell next year. If that is not enough, they add a list of three dishonorable mentions for what they term “stand-alone abusive practices, unsound court decisions, or legislative actions that create unfairness in the civil justice system.” They call it unfair only because they are on the other side of the courtroom.

Minnesota has been listed in the dishonorable mention because of their borrowing statute. In 2004, the Minnesota legislature enacted a new borrowing statute. The new statute essentially mirrors the previous statute in Minnesota, stating that when a non-resident plaintiff brings a claim in Minnesota, but that claim is based on another state’s laws, the statute of limitations from that state applies. The legislature made clear that this new borrowing statute only applies to claims arising from incidents that occurred on or after August 1, 2004.

In Fleeger v. Wyeth, the Minnesota Supreme Court simply followed the law. Since the legislature stated that the new law only effected cases occurring after 2004, the old law applied to other cases.

“For ATRF to suggest we are a hellhole simply because we have judges that follow the law rather than cater to special interests reveals a great deal about ATRF. Simply put, they care only about their personal interest not being responsible for their own actions. ATRF is the embodiment of greed.” stated attorney Chuck Slane of TSR Injury Law, a Minnesota personal injury law firm that represents victims and their families. “The Courts of Minnesota have once again risen above the quagmire of political bickering and decided the case upon the law. We can all be proud to live in Minnesota. “

For years the league has minimized or denied statistics compiled by others showing a high percentage of former players, who sustained repetitive concussions, suffered some type of brain deterioration. The league finally commissioned a study on concussions and the data revealed that football players as young as 30 were 19 times more likely to be diagnosed with a memory disorder or dementia than the national average. Players over 50 were diagnosed with dementia-related illness at a rate of 5 times the national average.

Professional football players realize that the game is tough and that they may be injured. The players have also trusted that team doctors would accurately assess their ability to play — and bench them if warranted. When a player sustains a knee injury, they are out for weeks. When a player gets a concussion, sometimes they are out only one series of downs.

The brain is in many ways more fragile than other parts of the body. It does not heal like a fracture. All of these studies are showing the cumulative nature of concussions. The treatment of concussions needs to be modified.

News Report on Concussions and Professional Football

There is another study, by Dr. Bennet Omalu, forensic pathologist and neuropathologist in Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in which another type of brain injury was identified. Dr. Omalu named it Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). Dr. Omalu examined the brains of five former professional football players. Repeated concussions and sub-concussions (”build-up” effect from repeated blows to the head) incurred during the play of football over a long period can result in CTE. The brain changes in CTE include scarring of brain tissue, damage to cerebral blood vessels, and torn microfibers.

The bottom line is that professional players have to be more in tune with their health. In younger players, parents need to be more proactive on behalf on their children.

As time goes by, statistics will continue to support that brain injuries occur in contact sport participants and that the injuries can be compounded. What if you add a car accident to an old football injury or vice versa — the effects multiply.

What needs to change? Helmets? Treatment? Rules? Many people do talk about the possibilities that helmets increase the brain damage because they give players a false sense of security. There are new designs in helmets to reduce concussions. The new helmets are expensive and professional teams have not been willing to pay for them until there is more data to support that they really do reduce the number of concussions.

This information is provided as service of TSR Injury Law, a personal injury law firm serving Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington and the state of Minnesota. Our attorneys have extensive experience handling traumatic brain injury cases. Call 612-362-0000 for more information or contact a Minnesota Brain Injury Lawyer.

The focus should be on reducing the number of medical errors. Currently in the United States, there are about 98,000 deaths per year due to medical error.

“We have an epidemic of medical malpractice, not of malpractice lawsuits.” ~ Tom Baker, University of Pennsylvania law professor

“The major problem out there is medical errors that are not compensated, rather than frivolous claims that are compensated.” ~ William Sage, University of Texas at Austin Vice Provost for Health Affairs

The Minnesota Model

The nation should look to the state of Minnesota for ideas on how to combat rising medical costs. From 1997 to 2008, according to the Minnesota Supreme Court statistics, medical malpractice lawsuit filings went down 45%. In 2007 alone, out of 1.9 million cases filed; only 114 were medical malpractice suits.

There are a number of reasons for the amazing statistics in Minnesota. They include:

• Minnesota has proficient, conscientious physicians.
• Minnesota has excellent clinics and hospitals.
• Minnesota state lawmakers have enacted a statutory affidavit rule. This requires plaintiff attorneys to certify that they have sound medical support before they file any medical malpractice lawsuit.
• Minnesota juries tend to be reasonable.
• Minnesota judges have the power to reduce any verdict deemed excessive.

The system is working in Minnesota and the benefits filter down. Minnesota doctors pay a fraction of what doctors in other states pay for malpractice insurance. (Minnesota has the lowest malpractice premiums in the entire U.S.) In Minnesota, the annual average percentage of growth in health care expenditures is 8.6%, only 14 states have a lower percentage rate.

Medical malpractice reform will not save one life. We need to work to prevent injuries. We need to find ways to improve patient care and safety. We need to penalize those who don’t.

This information is provided as a service of TSR Injury Law, a personal injury law firm serving Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the state of Minnesota. Our partners are consistently named Minnesota Super Lawyers. Additionally, they are on the Board of Governors of Minnesota Association for Justice and frequent speakers on litigation and personal injury law. For more information, call 612-362-0000 or submit our free consultation form.

• defensive medicine
• frivolous lawsuits
• high malpractice insurance premiums driving doctors out of business

The Truth of the Matter:

Defensive Medicine Does Not Increase Health Care Costs

A 2004 report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), reviewed studies claiming tort reform reduced health care costs. The CBO proceeded to conduct their own analysis, finding no evidence that restrictions on tort liability reduced medical spending. Their analysis also found no difference in health care spending per capita between states with or without limits on malpractice awards. Another study concluded that there was not a significant reduction in payments for Medicare-covered services in states that adopted tort reform.

Frivolous Lawsuits Are Not Responsible for Increased Costs

A 2006 study by researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women’s Hospital debunks the view that frivolous litigation is widespread and expensive. The authors reviewed 1,452 closed claims from five malpractice insurance companies across the U.S. Their findings appeared in the May 11, 2006 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine.

• The reviewers found that nearly all the claims involved a treatment-related injury.
• More than 90% involved a physical injury, which was usually severe (80% resulted in significant or major disability, 26% resulted in death).
• The reviewers deemed that 63% of the injuries were due to error.
• Out of the remaining 37%, though they lacked evidence of error some were close calls.
• Nearly three-fourths of the claims (72%) that did not involve error did not receive compensation.
• Among claims that involved medical error, 73% received compensation.

“Overall, the malpractice system appears to be getting it right about three quarters of the time,” said lead author David Studdert. According to the CBO, the frequency of malpractice suits per capita, nationally, were static at approximately 15 claims per 100 physicians per year for a 10 year period, from mid-1990s through the mid-2000s. A similar report from the National Center for State Courts, shows that the number of cases actually decreased by 8% between 1996 – 2006. This does not support the claim of rampant increase in “frivolous lawsuits”.

Doctors Are Not Leaving Practice Because of Insurance Premiums

According to data compiled by the AMA, the number of practicing physicians has been rising steadily for decades in the U.S. Furthermore, the number of physicians increased faster than the population growth in 46 states. In the remaining four states where the number of physicians increased slower than the population growth, these states have medical malpractice caps.

In closing, statistics DO NOT support tort reform. Tort reformers fail to see that medical malpractice reform will not saves lives. It is up to the insurers, doctors, and the medical industry to find ways to improve patient safety through more stringent protocols and accountability.

This information is provided as a service of TSR Injury Law, a leading personal injury law firm serving Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the state of Minnesota. Our partners have decades of experience handling complex medical cases, including traumatic brain injuries, spinal injuries, and medical malpractice cases. Call 612-362-0000 to schedule a free consultation or submit our contact form.

Minneapolis tops our list of America’s safest cities, and not just for its crime rate. In ranking the cities on our list, we looked at workplace fatalities, traffic-related deaths and natural disaster risk; the City of Lakes ranked in the top 10 of all four categories. It’s also one of America’s best places to live cheaply and offers easy access to some of the most scenic drives in the country. Forbes.com

Minneapolis has experienced a reduction in violent crimes in each of the last three years. Violent crimes are the lowest they have been in nearly 10 years. City officials credit proactive policing targeting the most violent criminals, reducing youth violence, and cracking down on drunk driving as being the reasons for the shift in statistics.

Additional perks to living in Minneapolis include a great bicycle path system and a thriving high-tech community. TSR Injury Law works to ensure that Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota stays safe and that the rights of the people are protected.

This information is provided as a service of TSR Injury Law, a personal injury law firm serving Minneapolis, Bloomington, and the state of Minnesota. Our partners are skilled, persuasive litigators with decades of experience. TSR Injury Law supports the mission of MADD Minnesota and has been a financial supporter for many years. Call 612-362-0000 or submit our free consultation form.

Stella Liebeck was found 20% negligent, reducing the compensatory damages to $160,000. Then the trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. She did not receive that amount. An undisclosed post-verdict settlement was reached.

This case is cited as a reason for the need for tort reform laws. In actuality, it is an example of how the system works effectively. The media tends to focus on a few random cases, presenting a false perception that the system is overflowing with frivolous lawsuits. Often these random verdicts have either been thrown out or substantially reduced by trial judges or appellate courts, which is exactly how the system was designed to work.

The following is quoted from an article by S. Reed Morgan, plaintiff’s attorney, explaining and defending the McDonald’s lawsuit verdict.

I am the trial lawyer who tried Stella Liebeck’s case.

There has been a great amount of uproar from those persons displeased at the size of the verdict, who have heralded this verdict as an example of a runaway jury and individuals who will not accept responsibility for their own actions.

This cannot be true since McDonald’s witnesses admitted that nobody knows or expects that spilled coffee will cause the severe type of burns that McDonald’s coffee causes as a result of its being sold at a temperature of 180 to 190 degrees.

Stella Liebeck; at age 79, purchased a cup of McDonald’s coffee while she was a passenger in her grandson’s automobile. Her grandson pulled to the curb and stopped the car, and Mrs. Liebeck attempted to hold the cup securely between her knees while she removed the plastic lid.

It was at this time that it tipped over, causing third-degree burns.

The jury is the voice of the community. It awarded $200,000 to her for compensatory damages, reduced by $20,000 for her negligence, and $2.7 million in punishment for punitive damages.

The Court of Appeals can set it aside if it’s wrong.

It cost more than $50,000 to prosecute this case in costs alone, not including legal fees. If the jury had not stopped them, who would do it? How long would this have gone on?

Further, the system has numerous safeguards to overturn any verdict, including this one, if it is, in fact, excessive, not the least of which is an appeal.

To set the record straight, the following information was presented to an impartial jury of six men and six women for six days, which resulted in a finding that the product is unreasonably dangerous, and it is sold in breach of the implied warranty of fitness imposed by the Uniform Commercial Code. It is not fit for consumption.

Obviously, the jury found that McDonald’s coffee has caused enough human misery and suffering, and no one should be made to suffer for being exposed to the sale of excessively hot coffee at McDonald’s and other establishments.

You will be shocked and amazed to learn what was proved at trial:

• McDonald’s Corporation sells its coffee at 180°-190°F by corporate specifications.
• McDonald’s coffee, if spilled, causes full thickness burns (third-degree to the muscle/fatty tissue layer) in 2-7 seconds.
• Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement, and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and results in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain, and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years.
• McDonald’s Corporation has known about this unacceptable risk for more than 10 years and it was brought to their attention through other suits (more than 700 reported claims from 1982-1992), repeatedly, to no avail. McDonald’s produced a witness who said this number of burned people was statistically “trivial”.
• Witnesses for McDonald’s admitted in court that the consumers are unaware of this risk of serious burns and that McDonald’s Corporation is and has been aware of this risk.
• McDonald’s Corporation testified through its witnesses, that it did not intend to turn down the heat.
• McDonald’s admitted that it did not warn of the nature and extent of this risk of harm and could offer no explanation as to why it did not.
• McDonald’s Corporation admitted its coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it will cause severe scalds if spilled or drunk.
• McDonald’s Corporation has burned more than 700 people over the past 10 years, many with severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks.
• Mrs. Liebeck’s treating physician testified this was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen and that this risk of harm was unacceptable.
• The chairman of the Department of Mechanical Engineering and BioMechanical Engineering at the University of Texas testified this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did the most widely publicized burn doctor in the United States, who is the editor-in-chief of the Burn and Rehabilitation Journal, the most widely recognized burn journal in the world.
• McDonald’s Corporation generates revenues in excess of $1.3 million daily from the sale of the coffee, selling 1 billion cups of coffee each year.
• McDonald’s Corporation has burned not only men and women but children and infants with their scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by their own employees.
• At least one individual had scalding hot coffee dropped in her lap through the service window, resulting in third-degree burns to her inner thighs and other sensitive areas of the body, resulting in disability for years.

I have recently been contacted by the heirs of a lady that went into diabetic shock and died as the result of being burned at McDonald’s.

In short, the consumer may be guilty of one second of momentary inadvertence or a mistake resulting in horrible, excruciatingly painful, disfiguring, expensive and life-threatening injuries.

Compare the behavior of McDonald’s, a family restaurant that caters to children, which was unequivocally shown to have known of and ignored this risk for more than 10 years, whose quality-control manager testified that he knows the consumer is unaware of the risk and knows the consumer does not anticipate that it will cause these very serious burns.

The consumer does not know that coffee this hot causes these injuries. Nor do they know it’s served this hot.

We had to teach McDonald’s that for every degree above 140 degrees Fahrenheit, our skin burns twice as fast. At 180 degrees Fahrenheit, there is no escape from these types of burns. The product is, by definition, defective or unreasonably dangerous. This is the applicable law. They broke the law.

Why had they not studied this risk? They have laboratories and a university devoted to the study of selling food and drinks. They had a legal duty to sell safe products, not products with a hidden risk.

McDonald’s testified through management that it had no intention of lowering the temperature:

“No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we’re
using in that regard right now.”

This is callous indifference to the welfare of its consumers.

The jury applied the law of punitive damages to deter McDonald’s and other similarly situated corporations from exposing consumers to this risk by imposing a penalty of two days worth of coffee sales, or $2.7 million, for willfully ignoring the safety of children, women and men that feed the McDonald’s money tree.

So, the issue is why should we tolerate this kind of irresponsibility?

Is this an individual who didn’t take responsibility, or a corporation that didn’t take responsibility? The jury found 20 percent against Mrs. Liebeck and 80 percent against McDonald’s.

The risk of serious burns above 130 degrees has been well documented by the Shriners Burn Center which has published warnings to the franchise food industry that it is unnecessarily causing serious scald burns.

McDonald’s admitted it never, in all these years, consulted a single burn doctor or thermo-dynamics. Our firm did, and presented this to the jury in Albuquerque, which in turn did what is necessary to remedy the problem.

Interestingly the news media, the day after the verdict, documented that coffee at McDonald’s in Albuquerque is now sold at 158 degrees. Mission accomplished.

This will cause third-degree burns in about 60 seconds, rather than in two to seven seconds. The margin of safety has been increased as a direct consequence of this verdict.

This information is provided by TSR Injury Law. Our attorneys are consistently named Minnesota Super Lawyers by their peers. Chuck Slane was voted one of the 2009 Minnesota Top 40 Personal Injury Lawyers and Rich Ruohonen was singled out to receive the Minnesota Association for Justice 2008-09 Excellence Award. Call 612-362-0000 or submit our contact form.

Along with the change in traffic flow, bike lanes and bike boxes have been added. The change is set for October 10th. Are we ready for this? How confusing will it be? Will it work? Will it be safe for bicyclists? Time will tell.

Hennepin Avenue, First Avenue Traffic Change

Revitalization efforts are being made downtown by changing traffic flow in the following blocks:

• Hennepin Ave from 1st St N to 12th St N
• 1st Avenue North from 2nd St N to 8th St N
• Hawthorne Ave from 8th St N to 12th St N

The change is part of a 10-year plan by the City of Minneapolis to make the downtown more accessible to vehicles, public transportation, bicycles, and pedestrians. Officials hope that this change will make for even more vibrant main streets to showcase what is best about the city. City officials recognize that theaters, restaurants, major retail stores, and other businesses along Hennepin and 1st avenues are destinations and more easily reached by two-way traffic.

Bike Box: Biking and Walking in Minneapolis

Bicyclists and pedestrians will see improvements to make biking and walking downtown a more positive experience. New traffic signals have been installed that include pedestrian countdown timers, there are new bike lanes on First Avenue, there are shared bike-bus-right-turn lanes on Hennepin Avenue, and there are new bike boxes to make bicycling easier for commuters.

A bike box is a 10′ deep area between the crosswalk and stop bars at an intersection and marked clearly with large bike symbols. (as in image above) Left-turning bicyclists can get in front of motor traffic stopped at the red light. Motor vehicles are not allowed in the bike box while stopped. Only key intersections have the bike box feature.

New Bike Lane for Minneapolis

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Minneapolis ranks as the #2 bicycling city in the nation. The city has 40 miles of dedicated bicycle lanes and 83 miles of off-street bicycle paths. Bicycling is a cost-effective, eco-friendly, and healthy way to get around town.

Hennepin Avenue will have one through lane each way, designated left-turn lanes, and a combined / shared bus-bike-right-turn lane which will be marked with “sharrow” symbols on the pavement (shown at right). Bicyclists are encouraged to use the shared lane, but the other lanes for moving, passing, and turning are still legal and available for use.

The new traffic flow on 1st Avenue includes a 6′ wide bike lane along the curb. Off-peak parallel parking will be allowed next to the bike lane. The planners thought this would work as a buffer to further protect bicyclists. Parallel parking will not be allowed during the following times:

• 7 – 9 a.m., Monday – Friday
• 4 – 6 p.m., Monday – Friday
• 10 p.m. – 6 a.m. Friday & Saturday nights from 3rd to 6th streets

The City of Minneapolis is committed to the 4500 bicyclists that regularly commute in downtown. They have a bicycle master plan, a bike cost share program to help businesses install bike racks to facilitate employees commuting, and they rent out bike lockers at parking ramps.

This information has been provided as a service of TSR Injury Law serving Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota. Our personal injury attorneys are skilled, ethical litigators who care about justice for the people. If you have been in a bicycle accident, pedestrian accident, or car accident, and need legal representation to interact with the insurance companies, call 612-362-0000 or submit free contact form.