In a photo taken
prior to his 2022 accident, Dave Deming is pictured with his wife Kelly, who continues
to provide much of the round-the-clock attendant care that he requires. The
couple has three adult children and resides on a farm a few miles southeast of
Big Rapids, where despite dramatic changes in their lifestyle they can still
enjoy the simple pleasures of nature such as bird-watching.
By Tom Kirvan
Legal News
A long-haul truck driver for the better part of 25 years, Dave Deming grew accustomed to making a round trip between Michigan and North Carolina each week.
Deming was about to make the 14-hour return trip home from North Carolina with a load of cottonseed when tragedy struck on Dec. 8, 2022.
The day also set in motion a legal battle under Michigan’s No-Fault Act that underwent sweeping changes in 2020, revisions that under the pretext of reducing the cost of insurance premiums also has caused various unintended consequences that are impacting people like Deming and his wife.
The Demings, who reside near Big Rapids, never expected to be embroiled in a potentially precedent-setting case, where various constitutional issues revolving around equal protection and due process claims are being contested.
And yet, he is the named plaintiff in an April 16 suit filed in Oakland County Circuit Court against Progressive Corp. and several of its insurance affiliates, alleging that the defendant “improperly delayed and denied the proper payment of insurance benefits” after Deming suffered a series of severe injuries from a fall off his semi-truck while it was being loaded with cottonseed.
Deming is represented by attorneys Nick Andrews and Meagan O’Donnell of Liss & Andrews, which deals exclusively with No-Fault Act cases involving the catastrophically injured.
Deming was parked getting a full load of cottonseed. He was climbing up the front side of the trailer on a ladder when he lost my balance and fell approximately 12 feet, hitting his head on the pavement. He was knocked unconscious but came to briefly. He then woke up in the hospital with all sorts of injuries, including brain hemorrhages, multiple vertebra and rib fractures, a bruised lung, and assorted other problems resulting from the severe brain damage and severe spinal cord harm he suffered.
Deming spent five weeks in a North Carolina hospital being treated for his injuries, while also recovering from spinal fusion surgery with rod placement for the L1 vertebra fracture. He then was transported by small plane to a Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation facility in Saginaw for further acute rehab care, a stay that lasted another three weeks.
The plane trip back to Deming’s home state was arranged by the Michigan chapter of Pilots for Christ.
Deming requires skilled attendant care 24/7, according to his attorneys. The care involves tending to basic personal hygiene, dressing, and groomings along with bowel protocol, bladder catheterizations, and medication administration.
His care responsibilities at home have been shouldered almost entirely by his wife, who worked as Certified Nursing Assistant for much of her career. Kelly is paid for just 8 hours a day or 56 hours per week under terms of the revised Michigan No-Fault Act, which went into effect in 2020. Under provisions of the revised law, attendant care provided by a “family member” is limited to 56 hours per week, leaving the remaining time – 112 hours – to someone from outside the household.
“This is just one of several shortcomings in the revised law and was a predictable outcome of legislation enacted in haste,” said Andrews. “The result here is that people like the Demings – along with many others in similar situations – are getting the short end of the stick.”
Liss & Andrews – on behalf of the Demings – is challenging the state’s 56-hour per week caregiver limitation for family member care.
“In effect, the state has created a double standard in terms of care, limiting family members to a certain number of hours per week, while Certified Nursing Assistants working for commercial home health agencies are not restricted by this same limit that families providing the same care are bound by,” said Andrews.
“Making it even more troublesome is the fact people who live in rural communities like the Demings have very limited options in finding quality attendant care,” Andrews added. “The difficulties are virtually insurmountable as the pool of qualified care-givers in those areas is so small.”
To make matters worse, Andrews indicated, the cost of providing care by a commercial agency can range from 31 percent to as much as 154 percent higher than that furnished by a family member, thereby defeating much of the underlying purpose of lowering insurance premiums.
In the complaint, Andrews and O’Donnell argued that “there is no rational relationship between the proffered governmental interest in reducing rates and forcing injured persons to use commercial attendant care instead of family attendant care providers who typically provide better care at a more economical cost.”
They point to an American Medical Association study that found that “Patient- and family-centered care is changing the way hospitals provide patient care, increasing staff satisfaction, decreasing costs, and improving patient outcomes.”
Said Andrews: “Aside from being discriminatory, which violates the Equal Protection clause in the Constitution, there is no real economic basis for this revision to the law. The costs will be more – and in many respects much more. The injured also will be deprived of the kind of loving and considerate care that only a family member can provide. To prevent round-the-clock family care makes no sense at all.”
The Demings, as expected, wholeheartedly agree, promising to hold firm in their resolve to right what they believe is a serious legal wrong.
“I’m just grateful that I have someone like Kelly who is so kind, helpful, and loving,” said Dave, who alternates between and a wheelchair and walker to get around.
“She has been a godsend and I thank God every day for having her in my life. We’re obviously in this together, and we intend to remain strong in seeing this case to a successful end.”
Legal News
A long-haul truck driver for the better part of 25 years, Dave Deming grew accustomed to making a round trip between Michigan and North Carolina each week.
Deming was about to make the 14-hour return trip home from North Carolina with a load of cottonseed when tragedy struck on Dec. 8, 2022.
The day also set in motion a legal battle under Michigan’s No-Fault Act that underwent sweeping changes in 2020, revisions that under the pretext of reducing the cost of insurance premiums also has caused various unintended consequences that are impacting people like Deming and his wife.
The Demings, who reside near Big Rapids, never expected to be embroiled in a potentially precedent-setting case, where various constitutional issues revolving around equal protection and due process claims are being contested.
And yet, he is the named plaintiff in an April 16 suit filed in Oakland County Circuit Court against Progressive Corp. and several of its insurance affiliates, alleging that the defendant “improperly delayed and denied the proper payment of insurance benefits” after Deming suffered a series of severe injuries from a fall off his semi-truck while it was being loaded with cottonseed.
Deming is represented by attorneys Nick Andrews and Meagan O’Donnell of Liss & Andrews, which deals exclusively with No-Fault Act cases involving the catastrophically injured.
Deming was parked getting a full load of cottonseed. He was climbing up the front side of the trailer on a ladder when he lost my balance and fell approximately 12 feet, hitting his head on the pavement. He was knocked unconscious but came to briefly. He then woke up in the hospital with all sorts of injuries, including brain hemorrhages, multiple vertebra and rib fractures, a bruised lung, and assorted other problems resulting from the severe brain damage and severe spinal cord harm he suffered.
Deming spent five weeks in a North Carolina hospital being treated for his injuries, while also recovering from spinal fusion surgery with rod placement for the L1 vertebra fracture. He then was transported by small plane to a Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation facility in Saginaw for further acute rehab care, a stay that lasted another three weeks.
The plane trip back to Deming’s home state was arranged by the Michigan chapter of Pilots for Christ.
Deming requires skilled attendant care 24/7, according to his attorneys. The care involves tending to basic personal hygiene, dressing, and groomings along with bowel protocol, bladder catheterizations, and medication administration.
His care responsibilities at home have been shouldered almost entirely by his wife, who worked as Certified Nursing Assistant for much of her career. Kelly is paid for just 8 hours a day or 56 hours per week under terms of the revised Michigan No-Fault Act, which went into effect in 2020. Under provisions of the revised law, attendant care provided by a “family member” is limited to 56 hours per week, leaving the remaining time – 112 hours – to someone from outside the household.
“This is just one of several shortcomings in the revised law and was a predictable outcome of legislation enacted in haste,” said Andrews. “The result here is that people like the Demings – along with many others in similar situations – are getting the short end of the stick.”
Liss & Andrews – on behalf of the Demings – is challenging the state’s 56-hour per week caregiver limitation for family member care.
“In effect, the state has created a double standard in terms of care, limiting family members to a certain number of hours per week, while Certified Nursing Assistants working for commercial home health agencies are not restricted by this same limit that families providing the same care are bound by,” said Andrews.
“Making it even more troublesome is the fact people who live in rural communities like the Demings have very limited options in finding quality attendant care,” Andrews added. “The difficulties are virtually insurmountable as the pool of qualified care-givers in those areas is so small.”
To make matters worse, Andrews indicated, the cost of providing care by a commercial agency can range from 31 percent to as much as 154 percent higher than that furnished by a family member, thereby defeating much of the underlying purpose of lowering insurance premiums.
In the complaint, Andrews and O’Donnell argued that “there is no rational relationship between the proffered governmental interest in reducing rates and forcing injured persons to use commercial attendant care instead of family attendant care providers who typically provide better care at a more economical cost.”
They point to an American Medical Association study that found that “Patient- and family-centered care is changing the way hospitals provide patient care, increasing staff satisfaction, decreasing costs, and improving patient outcomes.”
Said Andrews: “Aside from being discriminatory, which violates the Equal Protection clause in the Constitution, there is no real economic basis for this revision to the law. The costs will be more – and in many respects much more. The injured also will be deprived of the kind of loving and considerate care that only a family member can provide. To prevent round-the-clock family care makes no sense at all.”
The Demings, as expected, wholeheartedly agree, promising to hold firm in their resolve to right what they believe is a serious legal wrong.
“I’m just grateful that I have someone like Kelly who is so kind, helpful, and loving,” said Dave, who alternates between and a wheelchair and walker to get around.
“She has been a godsend and I thank God every day for having her in my life. We’re obviously in this together, and we intend to remain strong in seeing this case to a successful end.”
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
