Trial Attorney Blog

If a person is injured or killed as a result of the negligent operation of a boat or as a result of a boat engine manufacturing or design defect, under Georgia law, the injured person or the family of those killed, may have the right to seek compensation and other forms of redress in a suit against the operator, seller or manufacturer of the boat.
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) estimates that in an average year, approximately 200 to 250 non-fatal injuries and an additional 25-35 deaths are reported as a result of a person being struck by the propellor and/or propulsion unit of a boat.
These cases are not as unusual as one might think. In one memorable case handled by the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP, our client was seriously injured when his outboard engine suddenly jumped from neutral into forward gear resulting in his being struck by the propellor. After notifying the manufacturer of the engine of the accident, they sent one of their experts to inspect the boat. At the time of the inspection, the boat was in the water; however, it was being supported by an overhead crane. While videotaping their expert’s inspection of the boat, we were able to document the defect when the boat, suddenly and without warning, jumped from neutral into forward gear on its own almost throwing the manufacturer’s expert into the water. In that case, the manufacturer had utilized a defective gearbox part which, when worn, allowed the boat to jump into forward gear.

Continue reading

In Georgia, under the provisions of O.C.G.A. § 51-4-1 and 2, the measure of damages in a wrongful death action is “full value of the life of the decedent as shown by the evidence, without deducting for any of the necessary or personal expenses of the decedent had he lived.” The full value of the life of the decedent includes not only all economic damages sustained by the decedent such as lost wages, but also non-economic damages such as the enjoyment of life. Peculiar to Georgia law, the measure of damages is from the standpoint of the decedent. What did the decedent lose? Obviously, if someone was married and employed at the time of death, they lost the society and affection of their wife and children and the enjoyment of their career. By looking at the damage question from the standpoint of the decedent, the jury is not allowed to look at the sympathy and bereavement of the surviving heirs, but must view the evidence from the standpoint of what the decedent lost when their life was wrongfully taken from them by the negligence of the third party who has been sued for their wrongful death.
With respect to non-economic damages, obviously, this is a very broad term which includes not only enjoyment of life but also advice, assistance, care, companionship, counsel, and loving services. These are the “non-economic” portions of the damage caused by the wrongful death which when coupled with the economic damages (typically the amount of money lost by the wrongful death), total the “full value of the life of the decedent.”
Obviously, in proving damages in a wrongful death case, it is important that counsel prove that the decedent’s life had more value apart from their own economic producing potential. Typically, the largest component of a wrongful death claim involves the non-economic damages. Many people who are extremely gifted may not be high wage earners and yet the full value of their life may be greater than the life of a high wage earner. People like poets, artists, musicians, and some retirees may have a much fuller life than younger people but in any case, under Georgia law, the unique provisions of the law are such that a jury must determine the “full value” of the life of the decedent from the standing point of the decedent involved in the case. By making allowances for both economic and non-economic portions of the damages, the jury is given wide latitude in determining what compensation would be fair and reasonable under the circumstances of any given case where a wrongful death has occurred.

A woman was reportedly seriously injured in Gainesville, Georgia on Friday evening when the brakes on a golf cart failed while going down a hill at a private political fund-raising event. WSBTV.com reported that the golf cart was shuttling people to a home in the Harbour Point subdivision when it’s brakes failed and the cart overturned.
Although no details about the failure have been reported, a thorough inspection of the golf cart is in order to determine why the accident occurred. Had the cart been properly maintained? Was there a defective part involved or was there a design defect?
Having litigated numerous serious injury and wrongful death cases over the years, the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP know that in any case where there has been a mechanical failure, it is absolutely crucial that the evidence be preserved and that the evidence be inspected as soon as possible by an engineer or any other expert qualified to document and evaluate such a failure.

Continue reading

The status of the decedent by in large determines who has the right to sue in a wrongful death case. Where someone is killed through the negligent acts of a third party, such as a truck driver or product manufacturer, Georgia law proscribes who has the right to sue such a cause of action. If the person is married at the time of his or her death, the surviving spouse has the right to bring a cause of action for the wrongful death of the decedent. If the decedent is not survived by a spouse, but is survived by children, then the decedent’s children have the cause of action. If the decedent dies without any spouse or children, then the decedent’s parents have the cause of action. If the decedent dies with no surviving spouse, children or parent, then in that event, the administrator of the decedent’s estate has the cause of action and may bring it for the benefit of any remaining relatives. In short, under Georgia law, there is a hierarchy of those who are allowed to bring wrongful death cases but someone is always authorized under the law to bring such a case where the decedent’s death was caused by the negligent acts of a third party.
At our firm we have handled many different wrongful death cases for all of the above categories. We have represented widows, widowers, parents, children and estate representatives. In those cases where the cause of action is vested with a surviving spouse, to the extent the decedent was also survived by children, the spouse proceeds in a fiduciary capacity. In the event of a recovery, the spouse has to divide the recovery with remaining children, but in no event will the spouse receive less than one-third (1/3) of the recovery regardless of the number of children. In short, if there are multiple children, the spouse will receive one-third (1/3) and the children will divide equally the remaining two-thirds (2/3) of any such recovery.
It is important that counsel determine whether a potential client is vested with a cause of action in considering whether a wrongful death case exists. We have been approached many times by siblings, ex-spouses, step-children and the like in situations where there is no valid cause of action that may be brought y the person involved. In Georgia, the law sets forth the classifications of those that are legally authorized to bring wrongful death actions. While a step-child or grandparent or other third party might, under certain circumstances, conceivably have a claim, it would only be in those circumstances where they were appointed as representative of the estate and no one else was statutorily recognized to bring the case. Again, such inquiries must be made when the case is initially being evaluated, because the law sets forth procedurally who has the right to bring the claim.

It is often said that a picture is worth a thousand words. If there is a picture of an injured individual in a hospital having recently undergone major trauma, such photographic evidence truly can be worth a thousand words in demonstrating to the jury the nature and extent of the client’s injury. As an example, if someone had a serious burn injury, one can imagine the impact of such photographic evidence. Words simply cannot describe such injuries. The same is often true of photographs of demolished cars and vehicles that have been hit by large tractor trailers and/or x-rays showing broken bones in graphic detail. X-rays showing the implantation of large screws and other orthopaedic devices also can be helpful in demonstrating the extent of a clients injuries to a jury.
In some cases, where the injuries are horrific, and there is no available photographic evidence, we have retained the services of medical illustrators who can illustrate with correct anatomical detail the nature and extent of internal injuries. For example, an injury to a brain may only be partially appreciated by demonstrating (to an untrained jury) an MRI film. While a neurosurgeon might better appreciate the significance of a brain injury by interpreting the MRI film, a medical illustration may help show the damage portions of the brain caused by the trauma. Medical illustrations are also helpful in helping the jury understand the surgical techniques involved in treating serious personal injuries.
In any serious personal injury case, demonstrative exhibits, which help to demonstrate the nature and extent of the injuries sustained by the innocent client, are always helpful aids for the jury. Whether they be photographs, illustrations, computer animations or the like, any or all of the above techniques can be used by counsel to help a jury more fully appreciate the nature and extent of a client’s injuries. The better the demonstrative aid the truer the statement that a photograph is worth a thousand words. Once the jury understands and appreciates the significance of the injury, which can be demonstrated through a good demonstrative aid, words alone are no longer necessary to convince the jury of the extent of the suffering experienced by the injured client. Such aids are very helpful in obtaining adequate compensation for the injured client and, therefore, should be used where possible.

Most members of the public do not know how so-called “tort reform” serves to undermine basic liberties when it comes to our civil judicial system. One of the best examples of this is a little known law which serves to impede access to our courts. This is the “Offer of Judgment” statute which was passed by the Republican controlled Georgia Legislature, codified at O.C.G.A. § 9-11-68. Simply stated, if you are a middle class person and you wish to litigate a civil case, if you should do so and should receive “an offer of judgment” from the person or company you sue, you could be jeopardizing your family, your career, your home and every asset you own. Do the people in Georgia really appreciate what this law means and how it could affect them in the event they ever get into a good faith civil dispute with a third party? The answer is “No” as the public by in large never knows about such laws until and unless they are directly confronted by them – and by then it is too late to do anything about it.

The offer of judgment statute provides that if a civil litigant is sent an offer of judgment by a civil defendant and they refuse to accept it then they can be held liable for the other party’s attorneys fees and expenses. As an example, let us suppose that an average citizen in Georgia has a tort claim against a huge corporation. They file a lawsuit in good faith with representation of counsel. They then receive an offer of judgment from the large corporation. The offer of judgment could be for 50% of the value of their claim. However, if the citizen does not obtain 25% more from a jury than the offer of judgment then they will be held liable for the corporation’s legal expenses. Thus, if a corporation should run up legal expenses through their expensive lawyers in the amount of $250,000.00, $500,000.00 or even a million dollars, if the citizen should obtain a judgment which is less than the offer of judgment, then they will have to pay the attorneys’ fees to the corporation even if they win their case. Obviously, this is a terrible law which was designed to force those with less resources to accept settlements less than the total value of their case. This saves big business money by way of litigation expenses and otherwise but attempts to force the small average citizen to take less than their claim may be worth, otherwise they may risk financial suicide.

In a tort case, let’s say a large trucking company severely injures an innocent victim. During the litigation the trucking company makes an offer of judgment to pay the injured individual $500,000.00 for their broken legs, arms and other bodily injuries. If a jury should return a later verdict of $295,000.00 then, in that event, the innocent injured victim will have to pay attorney’s fees to the person who injured them because they did not get a judgment more than the offer. This can happen for a variety of reasons. A member of the jury could have been extremely conservative or even affiliated somehow directly or indirectly with the trucking company. Counsel for the victim may have underestimated problems with the case, may have misvalued the case, or failed to present all available evidence. Or there simply could have been a result which was not just and which did not award the victim a greater amount due to the makeup of the jury. Under any of these scenarios, the innocent victim is further victimized by the trucking company because the victim would then have to pay the legal expenses of the trucking company, even though they won the case. The offer of judgment statute is a terrible law. It forces people to take settlements or otherwise face financial ruin if they make the wrong decision. Large corporations and large businesses can afford to run the risk because they can afford the adverse consequences whereas the average citizen cannot. This is why the law is so unfair and truly is a denial of equal protection under the laws. At present, however, the law has been upheld by our courts.

Our firm is currently handling several serious automobile collision cases in which our innocent clients were severely and permanently injured by negligent corporations. In the accident cases I am referring to, both of our clients sustained very serious neck and back injuries resulting in numerous surgeries. Medical expenses and lost wages to date have already been substantial. However, because both of our clients are relatively young adults, the big fear is that as the clients grow older, their medical expenses and lost wages will increase. The issue is how to present such evidence to the insurance carrier in order to force them to agree to a reasonable settlement. Failing to achieve such a settlement, the issue then becomes how to demonstrate to a trial jury that the client’s expenses and pain and suffering will continue permanently over time. In short, how do you place a value on these damages? Our experience indicates that the best way to do so is by retaining the services of a Life Care expert.
A Life Care expert is trained to extrapolate from current medical data future medical costs based upon an analysis of the extent of the injury and the extent of medical treatment necessary to provide relief for it in the future. Typically, Life Care experts have training beyond that of other members of the medical profession and have focused on evaluating future medical needs whether it be future needs for rehabilitative or therapeutic services, future needs for medication, possible need for future surgery and the like. By conferring with treating physicians and by analyzing available medical evidence, a Life Care expert can prepare a plan which charts, as reasonable as possible, what is likely to occur over time given the current diagnosis and current medical conditions the client suffers from. Data from other similar cases in the past can support the extrapolations into the future.
The reason Life Care Plans are helpful is because they provide a overview of what the future holds for injured persons. For example, someone who loses a leg traumatically and is forced to have a prosthetic device is likely to require many different prosthetic devices over their lifetime. This is particularly true for a young person. The Life Care expert can calculate these costs over time and can come up with a Life Care Plan for the injured individual which includes consideration of such future medical costs, which would include not only the cost of the prosthetic device, but also therapy, medications and so forth. By extrapolating from present day data future medical costs, the Life Care expert and the Life Care Plan can help counsel represent those who are suffering today will undoubtedly continue to suffer in the future and will require future medical expenses. Depending upon the size of the claim and the kinds of damages involved, an economist might also need to be retained in order to quantify the present cash value of future medical expenses and/or lost wages. Either way, the Life Care expert can be of tremendous assistance in helping counsel convince the insurance carrier for the at fault defendant to pay the reasonable costs not only of damages incurred to date, but also anticipated future medical expenses and lost wages. If such an effort at settlement is unsuccessful, the Life Care expert can assist counsel also in helping to convince a jury that it should include as part of its award future medical expenses and lost wages.

Almost every week the Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP hear about horrific treatment of elderly patients in nursing homes or other long-term facilities. Occasionally they are held accountable for their negligent treatment.
Last month, the family of a 76 year old Florida woman was awarded $114 million in a nursing home abuse case. The woman died in 2003 after having been a patient at the nursing home. The lawsuit alleged that the elderly woman was injured after falling, had developed pressure sores, was over medicated, dehydrated and malnourished. The lawsuit alleged that the woman’s treatment at the facility led to her death. The breakdown of the verdict was $14 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages.
Elderly people are entitled to basic safety, respect and dignity. If you or someone you love is a victim of elder abuse or nursing home abuse, you have the right to hold the abuser responsible in court. The Georgia injury lawyers at Finch McCranie, LLP have represented injured Georgians in elder abuse lawsuits and other personal injury suits for over 40 years.. With our firm on the case, you can rest assured that you’ll get the extensive experience and personalized attention you deserve. For a free consultation, call us today at 1-800 228-9159.

Under the unique provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), there is no right to a jury trial. What this means is obvious: once an FTCA lawsuit is filed and the United States of America is named as the defendant, if the case cannot be resolved thereafter and a trial is required, the trial will be before a United States District Court judge which will sit, not only as the finder of fact, but also as the Judge of the law. In short, the U.S. District Court Judge will conduct a Bench Trial without the assistance of a jury to determine whether the claimant can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the United States government has committed an actionable tort which has resulted in damages against the claimant. If the claimant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was injured as a result of the tortious misconduct of a federal employee or agency, then in that event, the court will so rule and then will award appropriate damages caused by the tort.
In considering any claim under the FTCA, obviously, counsel will have to consider whether the U.S. District Court judge to whom the case is assigned is likely to rule favorably on the same. As an example, if the claim involves a medical malpractice claim against the Veterans Administration, the strength or weakness of the claim may convince counsel that a U.S. District Court judge may or may not rule favorably for the claimant. Such considerations obviously are important in considering whether a case should be settled or should be presented to the Trial Court. While the District Court does have the discretion to empanel a jury to render an advisory verdict any decision such a panel might make is not binding and the District Court is required by law to issue a ruling by itself relative to the merits of an FTCA case. Thus, in any case in which a civil claimant sues the United States government for damages caused by a tort committed by a federal agency or employee, counsel should always remember that they will only receive a Bench Trial in such a case and that it is the U.S. District Court that will decide all of the issues in the case.

We have blogged in the past about some of the unique provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and how they pertain to tort claims against the United States government. As an example, one unique provision is that no claim can be sued against the federal agency per se but instead only against the United States. In any lawsuit against the federal government in which a tort has occurred, the named defendant must be the United States of America. Thus, in a case where a postal driver runs a stop sign and injures someone or a drunk federal agent while on the job causes a collision with serious injuries, the lawsuit must be filed against the United States government. Of course, there are other unique provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act which require pre-suit notification of a claim but nonetheless, if settlement negotiations are unsuccessful, the claim must be filed against the United States of America in United States District Court.
In terms of where a case should be sued, this is another unique provision of the Federal Tort Claims Act. The claim can be filed either where the tort occurred or where the plaintiff resides. For example, if a tort occurs in one state and the plaintiff moves and wishes to file the lawsuit against the United States of America in the district where they then reside, they can do so. The issue is which jurisdiction might be more favorable for the claim. Some jurisdictions are more conservative than others and some jurisdictions might be more favorable with respect to claims against the federal government based on the demographics of the federal bench in the area where the claim can be filed. Thus, in any of these cases, counsel for the victim of a federal tort claim should consider not only the proper venue but must make sure that all pre-suit filing requirements are met and, when suit is filed, that it is filed solely against the United States of America.