Trial Attorney Blog

We read in the paper this week about a tragedy involving a motorcyclist who was struck and killed by a drunk driver. According to news accounts, the drunk driver was completely at fault in the incident and struck the innocent motorcycle rider from the rear. Regrettably, this case is indicative of the dangers to which all motorcycle riders are exposed. Such dangers are exponentially increased, obviously, when a drunk driver is involved.

We read in the paper this week about a tragedy involving a motorcyclist who was struck and killed by a drunk driver. According to news accounts, the drunk driver was completely at fault in the incident and struck the innocent motorcycle rider from the rear. Regrettably, this case is indicative of the dangers to which all motorcycle riders are exposed. Such dangers are exponentially increased, obviously, when a drunk driver is involved and as it appears in this case, the victim was simply at the wrong place at the wrong time occupying the same space and traveling down the same road as the drunk driver. The tragic results obviously were caused by the drunk driver’s negligence. Hopefully, the driver will be fully prosecuted and sent to jail. While jail time will be little solace to the victim’s family, nonetheless, it is necessary that there be a vigorous prosecution in all such cases in order to deter such actions by others.

The tragic results here obviously were caused by the drunk driver’s negligence. Hopefully, the driver will be fully prosecuted and sent to jail. While jail time will be little solace to the victim’s family, nonetheless, it is necessary that there be a vigorous prosecution in all such cases in order to deter such actions by others.

Approximately 2 years ago we published an article on the dangers of unsafe and dangeous glass products. We re-print this article because of the tragic death of a young woman who fell to her death this week after falling through a window at a hotel in downtown Atlanta. This accident was preventable but occurred because safety glass was apparently not properly used. In today’s modern age, with the known dangers involved, this is inexcusable. Our earlier blog entry is posted again in view of this tragedy:

“We are continually disturbed when we hear reports of persons injured by unsafe glass–decades after the need for “safety glazing” material (safety glass) was recognized. Our serious personal injury lawyers have delved deeply into the history of glass injuries in representing clients who have suffered what can be life-threatening injuries from unsafe glass, in premises liability cases tried successfully. We hope to share what we have learned about these dangerous products so that future injuries from dangerous glass can be prevented.

For more than thirty (30) years, the dangers of using glass that leaves sharp, jagged edges when it breaks has been known.

If a 28 year old male is killed and hypothetically he should have a 48 year life expectancy, when killed at age 28, the decedent has lost 46 years of his life according to the Annuity Mortality Tables of most states. Forty-eight years translates into 46 years times 365 days a year times 16 hours a day of consciousness (46x365x16=268,640 hours). Because we sleep for 8 hours a day, if one argues before a jury that the decedent would have consciously enjoyed life for 46 years times 365 days a year times 16 hours in a day this would result in the loss of 268,640 hours of life.

One way to approach a jury is to ask what would be fair compensation for the loss of human life. The average CEO in this country makes $10 million per year. Forty-six years of life is worth at least what a CEO makes in a single year and that’s an average CEO. Another way to look at it is to say to the jury that they should award what they consider to be fair compensation for the loss of life itself, the enjoyment of life, the relationships of life and things that will be lost forever, such as the relationship with a spouse, a child, professional pursuits, etc. Are such damages worth $20.00 an hour? If so, using the calculations above, the unit measurement approach for wrongful death damages, the full value of the life of the decedent would translate into 46 years x 365 days in a year x 16 hours of consciousness per day x $20.00 per hour for the loss of the life, which equals $5,372,800.00. Is this fair compensation for the loss of a life of a 28 year old male? Should it be double ($40.00/hr) or triple ($60.00/hr) this amount?

Under Georgia law, the measurement of damages is left to the enlightened consciousness of fair and impartial jurors seeking justice. A jury will have to decide what fair compensation is for the loss of human life based upon the educational background of the decedent, what they had to look forward to in their life and what they lost at the time of their wrongful death. This is a difficult calculation for any jury because translating the value of human life into dollars and cents is difficult at best even for the most fair and responsible juror. Nonetheless, it has to be done because there is no way to restore life to the decedent. All that we can do in our civil justice system is to provide a measure of compensation for that which was wrongfully taken.

As every individual is unique, so is the challenge faced by a trial attorney in trying to address a jury on the issue of the proper measurement of damages in the wrongful death case of any individual. All individuals are different. They come from different backgrounds and they are different ages, sexes, races, nationalities and religious beliefs. Whoever the unfortunate victim in a wrongful death case may be, the challenge is coming up with the best assessment of addressing damages when trying to obtain compensation for the loss of the full value of the life of the decedent. While all wrongful death cases involve the death of an innocent victim caused by the negligence of a third party, nonetheless, the measure of damages in all such cases is completely different depending upon the unique circumstances involved. As an example, there is a considerable difference in the measurement of damages of a young person verses an older person because the measurement for damages is the full value of the life of the decedent. Someone who has lived to 80 years of age and may only have a life expectancy of 5 years has a different loss than does a decedent who is only 20 years of age and loses 60 to 65 years of their life.
In Georgia there is a unique measurement used to establish the full value of the life of a decedent. The measurement is from the standpoint of the decedent, not the grieving family or heirs-at-law. What did the decedent lose when his life was prematurely cut short? Obviously, they lost the companionship of their loved ones, loss of their life interests, the loss of their relationships, the loss of their professional pursuits, etc. By definition, all such loses are unique to the particulars of the decedent.
In future blogs we will address how we go about trying to obtain fair compensation for the full value of a life of the decedent whether they be young or old, black or white, male of female. There are challenges when addressing the proper measurement of money damages in these cases because damages are arrived upon by a jury based upon their “enlightened consciousness” as to what fair compensation would be for the full value of the life of the decedent. There are many different approaches to discuss monetary damages which we will review in future entries on this subject.

According to a recently released report authored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, car accident cases and wrongful deaths cost the State of Georgia approximately $1.5 billion in the calendar year 2005. Regrettably, this is the most recent data which as been collated and studied. Nationwide, car accident related deaths cost approximately $41 billion. Georgia ranked number 4 among 10 other states with the highest medical and work lost costs associated with preventable deaths caused by motor vehicle collisions.

Obviously, much can be done to reduce the costs associated with these tragedies. The CDC’s Injury Center has made numerous recommendations primarily based upon restraint systems, seat belt laws and universal motorcycle helmet requirements. The greater the safety emphasis, the less the costs involved according to the CDC which is why the CDC has decided to launch its first ever Decade of Action for Road Safety. This program is designed to heighten awareness and to implement safety regulations and procedures that will reduce the number of preventable deaths across this Country.

We see in our office everyday the tragic outcomes of wrongful death cases. Life is quite frail and can be taken at any moment at any time in a variety of circumstances. Clients that come to us typically have lost a loved one due to the negligence of a third party in a car wreck case where the offending motorist ran a stop sign, was speeding, crossed the center line, was driving drunk or otherwise. Life can be lost in car crash cases in different ways but typically the at fault driver has violated a Uniform Rule of the road and it is the violation of a safety law which resulted in the loss of innocent life.

Georgia Governor Nathan Deal has signed a new law requiring all children under the age of 7 to be placed in booster seats unless they are over 40 pounds in weight and/or stand more than 4 feet 9 inches tall. The new law will go into effect this coming January to give parents time to purchase booster seats if needed. The reason for the new law: Protection of our children. Authorities have tracked injuries to children over the last five years and have determined that the vast majority of children injured in car accidents were injured because they were not properly restrained. In short, children were receiving preventable injuries and hopefully this law will assist in decreasing those numbers.
Until the passage of this law, children under the age of six had to be placed in a booster seat. Again, statistical evidence showed that children between the ages of 6 and 7 needed the same protection and thus the new law is designed to provide that for them. Even if a parent uses a booster seat, it is important that a proper product be utilized because failure to use a good product can still result in injury. Indeed, there are many product liability cases that have been filed over the years against the manufacturers of children’s restrain systems as well as restraint systems in automobiles utilized for adults. The mere fact that a restraint system is used will not guarantee that someone will not sustain injuries. This new law hopefully will dramatically increase the chances of child safety and decrease the chances of preventable injuries.

Women under 50 who follow the advice of a U.S. panel to forgo annual mammograms may be at risk for more severe forms of breast cancer

Three recent studies led by radiologists suggest that failing to get regular breast screenings left women more likely to discover cancer at an advanced stage. The delay resulted in larger tumors and a worse prognosis once the cancer was uncovered, the data found.

The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force said in 2009 that most women ages 40 to 49 do not need mammograms, recommending the screening for those with a disease history or who had a greater risk due to another factor.

Infections are now the number one cause of deaths in nursing homes, causing nearly 400,000 deaths annually.

A study published in the May issue of The America Journal of Infection Control reports that 15% of American nursing homes each year receive deficiency citations for infection control.

The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health, looked at deficiency data collected from about 16,000 nursing homes per year between 2000 to 2007 as part of Medicare/Medicaid certification.

Preventable medical errors kill thousands of Americans every year.

A recent study found that nearly one out of three hospital patients is harmed by the care they receive. The Institute of Medicine, an independent nonprofit organization within the National Academy of Sciences which works to provide unbiased advice to decision makers within the medical community, estimates that as many as 100,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors in hospitals. This is approximately the same number of annual deaths caused by auto accidents, AIDS, and breast cancer combined.

In the United States which has the world’s most skilled doctors and nurses and the finest hospitals, this statistic is unacceptable. These mistakes don’t just cause pain and anguish, but also add to skyrocketing health insurance bills for families, businesses, and government.

When an employee is injured on a job site, particularly on a construction job site, unfortunately the injuries sustained can be serious. Heavy equipment is typically involved on large commercial construction projects and it is not unusual for construction workers on large construction projects to be exposed to a variety of different dangers during the work day. If an employee is injured on the job, under our Workers’ Compensation laws, the claim will primarily have to be brought against the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance carrier which, of course, will restrict the employee’s rights to payment of medical expenses and limited lost wages, however, when the negligence of a non-employer/third party is involved, it is sometimes possible to obtain a liability judgment against the responsible third party.
A case that comes to mind which we handled involved a forklift owned by a third party which injured an employee who was on the job working for his employer. The driver of the forklift worked for a different company and when he ran over our client unfortunately the client’s leg had to be amputated. This case involved not only workers’ compensation benefits but also a third party liability claim against the at fault forklift driver and his employer. Although Motions to Dismiss were filed based on alleged employer immunity, the Court denied those motions and held that where there was evidence of the negligence of a third party, the injured employee of another company (our client) could proceed with his liability claim. Shortly after that ruling was obtained, we obtained an excellent settlement for our client.
In those cases where an employee is injured on the job and sustains a serious or permanent personal injury, the case must be carefully reviewed to see if there is the availability of a potential third party claim. Victims of negligence deserve to be compensated and if third party negligence injures an innocent employee at a construction site or otherwise, then that third party should bear the liability for the damages inflicted on the innocent victim.