Do I need a lawyer?

Often, no. This page is published by a law firm and it will still tell you that, because the alternative — a page that reaches "yes" no matter what you type into it — is not worth publishing.

The honest shape of the answer

Whether a lawyer adds anything to an injury claim turns on a small number of things: how badly you were hurt, whether anyone is disputing who is at fault, how much insurance exists and who it belongs to, whether anyone is asserting a right to be repaid out of your recovery, and how close you are to a deadline. Those factors interact, which is why a checklist generally cannot answer the question and a conversation usually can in about ten minutes.

What is worth saying plainly now, before any of the detail: a fee is only worth paying if what it buys exceeds what it costs. On a small, undisputed claim with clean liability and a cooperative adjuster, it frequently does not. Nobody advertising to you has an interest in saying so.

The factors, and the provision behind each one

1. Whether the claim is capped at economic loss

In a Minnesota motor vehicle case, damages for noneconomic detriment — pain, suffering, and the rest of it — are unavailable unless one of five statutory gates opens. Minn. Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 3 provides that in an action described in subdivision 1, "no person shall recover damages for noneconomic detriment unless" the sum described in clause (a) exceeds $4,000, or the injury results in permanent disfigurement, permanent injury, death, or disability for 60 days or more. The same subdivision defines disability as "the inability to engage in substantially all of the injured person's usual and customary daily activities."

This is the factor that most often points toward "no." Where none of the five gates is open, the claim consists of economic loss that is not paid or payable by a no-fault insurer under subdivision 2 — and much of that is documented by paperwork the injured person already holds. A lawyer adds less to an arithmetic exercise than to a contested one.

It also points the other way more often than people expect, because clause (a) is a calculation rather than a bill total: it subtracts benefits paid for diagnostic x-rays and for rehabilitative treatment, and adds the value of unpaid care given by a relative or a household member. See the guide on the tort threshold for the full text.

2. Whether fault is disputed, and against how many people

Minn. Stat. § 604.01, subd. 1 bars recovery only where the claimant's contributory fault "was not greater than the fault of the person against whom recovery is sought." Uncontested liability with a cooperative adjuster is the ordinary case for handling a claim without a lawyer.

Disputed fault changes the analysis, and multiple defendants change it more than most people realize. The comparison in § 604.01 runs against each person separately. In Cambern v. Sioux Tools, Inc., 323 N.W.2d 795 (Minn. 1982), the Minnesota Supreme Court held that "Absent proof of an economic joint venture, current Minnesota law is clear that defendants' fault is not to be aggregated in applying our Comparative Fault Statute, Minn.Stat. § 604.01 (1980)," following Marier v. Memorial Rescue Service, Inc., 296 Minn. 242, 207 N.W.2d 706 (1973). A claimant who is under the line against the defendants collectively can still be over it against each of them individually, and nobody on the other side of the file has a reason to raise that.

3. How much coverage exists, and whose it is

Minnesota's mandatory minimums are modest. Minn. Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3(1) requires residual liability limits of at least $30,000 for bodily injury to one person in one accident and $60,000 for two or more, and subdivision 3a(1) requires separate uninsured and underinsured motorist coverages of at least $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident. Where injuries are significant, the question stops being what the at-fault driver's policy says and becomes which other policies are in play — a question § 65B.47 answers by priority rules rather than by intuition, and § 65B.47, subd. 7 complicates by requiring a specific election before limits on two vehicles can be added together.

There is a self-help step here that costs nothing. Minn. Stat. § 72A.201, subd. 11: "An insurer must disclose the coverage and limits of an insurance policy within 30 days after the information is requested in writing by a claimant." Where the answer to that letter is a minimum-limits policy and no other coverage, the ceiling on the claim is frequently low enough that a fee cannot be justified.

4. Whether anyone is entitled to be repaid out of the money

This is the factor that most reliably surprises people, because it operates after the number is agreed. Several parties may have a claim on the proceeds, and each is governed by a different statute with a different rule about attorney fees and about being made whole first.

• A Minnesota-regulated health plan's subrogation clause is valid only if it applies after the covered person has received a full recovery and is subject to subtraction for the carrier's pro rata share of costs and reasonable attorney fees. Minn. Stat. § 62A.095, subd. 2. A self-funded employer plan is a different matter: under 29 U.S.C. § 1144(b)(2)(B) and FMC Corp. v. Holliday, 498 U.S. 52 (1990), "if the plan is uninsured, the State may not regulate it."
• A hospital lien under Minn. Stat. § 514.68, perfected under § 514.69, survives a settlement: § 514.71 provides that no release "shall be valid or effectual as against such lien unless such lienholder shall join therein, or execute a release of such lien."
• Medical Assistance is repaid under Minn. Stat. § 256B.042, subd. 5, after collection costs, with a floor — "The plaintiff, however, must receive at least one-third of the net recovery after attorney fees and other collection costs." The Revisor's note to the section limits its reach, recording that it "was preempted by federal law to the extent that it allows a lien for medical assistance paid to be placed on a medical assistance recipient's cause of action before the recipient's death," citing Martin ex rel. Hoff v. City of Rochester, 642 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 2002). A living recipient and a deceased one are not in the same position, which is the sort of distinction that decides whether the money is there.
• Workers' compensation is repaid under Minn. Stat. § 176.061, subd. 6, and under subdivision 8a a settlement with a third party "is not valid unless prior notice of the intention to settle is given to the employer within a reasonable time."
• Medicare's reimbursement right runs against "an entity that receives payment from a primary plan," and responsibility may be demonstrated by a release "whether or not there is a determination or admission of liability." 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(2)(B)(ii).

Where none of these exists, this factor is neutral. Where two or three of them do, the difference between a gross settlement and what actually reaches the injured person is not something an adjuster will work out for them.

5. How close a deadline is, and which deadline it is

Minnesota's general limitation for a negligence injury claim is six years, under Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5) — the provision the supreme court applied to a rear-end collision in Hermeling v. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Co., 548 N.W.2d 270 (Minn. 1996). That is a long runway, and it is why the "act now" urgency in most injury advertising is manufactured.

The exceptions are the reason the factor still matters. A claim against a municipality requires notice within 180 days after the loss is discovered under Minn. Stat. § 466.05, subd. 1, and a claim against the state the same under § 3.736, subd. 5. A dram shop claim requires notice served by the claimant's attorney "within 240 days of the date of entering an attorney-client relationship" under Minn. Stat. § 340A.802, subd. 2, and must be commenced within two years. A wrongful death action runs three years from death and never more than six years from the act or omission under Minn. Stat. § 573.02, subd. 1, and requires a court-appointed trustee under subdivision 3. Under Minn. R. Civ. P. 3.01 an action is commenced by service rather than by filing, and under Rule 5.04(a) an action not filed within one year of commencement "is deemed dismissed with prejudice against all parties."

Where the answer is usually no

Small, undisputed, and already resolving. Liability is not contested. No statutory gate under § 65B.51, subd. 3 is open, so the claim is economic loss the no-fault carrier has not covered. Nobody is asserting a right to repayment. Nothing about the deadline is close. In that case the adjuster's number and a lawyer's number are the same number, and the fee is a subtraction from it rather than an addition to it.

That description fits a great many Minnesota claims. Saying so costs this firm business and it is still the correct answer, because the alternative is a page engineered to reach "yes" on facts that do not support it.

Where the answer is usually yes

An injury that is permanent, disfiguring, or disabling for 60 days or more, which puts the case through § 65B.51, subd. 3(b) and makes noneconomic damages available. Fault genuinely in dispute, especially with more than one defendant, where the non-aggregation rule of Cambern controls. Coverage that has to be assembled from more than one policy. Two or more repayment rights competing for the same proceeds. A government defendant with a 180-day notice period, or a dram shop claim with a notice clock keyed to the day counsel is retained.

None of that is a promise about an outcome. It is a description of the cases where the work has something to do.

What this page cannot do

It cannot tell you which category you are in. Every factor above turns on a document or a fact — a policy declarations page, a discharge summary, a plan's funding arrangement, the identity of the defendant — that a page cannot see. What it can do is name the questions correctly, so that the ten-minute conversation is about the right things.

The start-here map lays out the questions in the order they arrive, and the guides index lists everything that has cleared verification so far.

If you would rather just ask

There is no charge to talk with us about your case, and there is no obligation attached to asking. If the honest answer is that you do not need a lawyer, that is the answer you will get — it is a better outcome for everyone than taking on a matter that cannot carry a fee.

Ask Madgett Law, LLC to look at it, or telephone 612-470-6529.