Trial Attorney Blog

Not only must Georgia car accident, truck accident, and other personal injury victims fight the insurance companies to get a fair shake, but now days they must also swim against the tide of so-called “tort reform.” Brainwashed by propaganda, bought and paid for by the most dangerous industries and their insurers, potential jurors naturally come into court believing that all injured litigants are exaggerating – or worse. Sadly, we taxpayers often end up paying the medical and other bills that the wantonly, careless and dangerous today escape having to pay, thanks to “tort reform.” As an example, insurance companies recently tried to deny workers compensation benefits to the dependants of undocumented hispanic workers who were killed or seriously injured on-the-job. Fortunately, the Georgia Court of Appeals did not buy their arguments and recognized that it as another attempt for insurance companies who received a premium for the coverage, to shift the financial responsibility to state and federal government and taxpayers.
Car accidents and other personal injury victims normally require expensive healthcare, and lose pay checks while unable to work. If the insurer for the careless driver, dangerous company, defective product manufacturer or other “injury-causer” is not held liable for the injury, then the victim likely will have no choice but to let Medicaid pick up the healthcare tab, and let the Social Security system pay disability benefits to replace earnings. The bottom line is that either the “injury causer” pays, or you and I do. Another reality, unknown to most of the public, is that juries are kept in the dark about insurance companies’ involvement in almost all personal injury trials. Even though an insurer actually is behind the entire fight in almost all personal injury cases – paying for the defense lawyer and any judgment ultimately collected – the jurors never are told this in a typical personal injury trial. Furthermore, the injured person has to sue the actual “injury causer” himself, and not his insurance company. In actuality, insurance companies are intimately involved in all litigation, including selection and hiring “expert witnesses”, including physicians, to testify and give favorable “expert opinions”at trial. Most Georgia attorneys who handle personal injury, workers compensation and serious injury cases recognize the names of these “hired guns” because insurance companies use them over and over. Many of the “experts” earn a substantial part of their annual income doing nothing but “independent” medical examinations and then testifying.
We believe it is time for the public to learn the truth about these issues that is based upon hard evidence – data that is not the propaganda of those with a financial interest in not paying just claims. Along those lines, one article that appears to be an extensive and well documented resource on the truth about “tort reform” is “The Frivolous Case for Tort Law Change,” published in May of 2005 by the Economic Policy Institute. In it are many other resources documenting this simple fact: “Tort reform” clearly is a very elaborate, and successful, propaganda war being waged by those who either have political agendas and aspirations and those with a financial interest in not paying the claims of innocent people who have been injured and damaged by the negligence of others.

Severe personal injuries – often including spinal paralysis, closed head injury brain damage, and even death – frequently result from vehicle damage that is sustained in rollover car accidents in Georgia and other states. According to April 19, 2007 Status Report published by the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety, nine vehicles, all SUV’s and pickups, have more than 75 deaths per million vehicles in single vehicle rollover crashes, compared with an average of 24 in all 2001-04 vehicles during 2002-05. This higher rate is largely because of their relatively high centers of gravity. The vehicle with the very highest death rate in rollovers is the 2-door, 2 wheel-drive Chevrolet Blazer. Its 134 deaths per million in rollover compare with an average 38 in all midsize, 2 wheel-drive SUV’s and 28 in 4 wheel-drive versions. According to this publication, not all midsize SUV’s have high death rates in single vehicle rollovers. For instance, at the time of the report, no driver deaths were reported in the 2 wheel-drive Lexus RX 330. This vehicle and increasing numbers of other passenger vehicles, especially SUV’s, are becoming equipped with standard or optional electronic stability control (ESC). This feature has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of fatal single-vehicle crashes including rollovers. More evidence that this ESC effectiveness is that all but 3 of 15 vehicles with the lowest overall death rates have this feature, usually standard (the Chevrolet Astro, Honda Odyssey, and Honda Pilot don’t). In contrast, ESC isn’t standard on any of the 16 vehicles with the highest death rates, and its optional on only 1 (the Nissan 350ZX). Accordingly, it is apparent that the ESC feature is an important feature in saving lives and reducing serious personal injury cases on Georgia highways.

When I speak to potential clients about claims against government employees and entities, they are often startled to learn about the antiquated but harsh doctrine of sovereign immunity. Many states have made changes to their laws to minimize the impact of this legal doctrine upon the innocent. However, in many circumstances, states like Georgia still employ the doctrine to defeat the claims of those injured by government actors. While some improvements in the law have been made, regrettably, they have not been sufficient to address all claims against government actors.

The policy reason behind the doctrine of sovereign immunity is to protect the public purse from claims made by citizens against their government. The theory seems to be that if a citizen sues the government for acts of negligence and money is collected, then the bill will have to be paid by taxpayers out of the public purse. In today’s modern society, however, with insurance being available to protect all government agencies just as in the private sector, the reason behind the doctrine seem to be less than compelling. Succinctly stated, the only public monies being paid are the amount of the premiums and the public is not being called upon to pay the claims per se. This being the case, a strong argument could be made that the doctrine of sovereign immunity should be completely abolished. Nonetheless, it is alive and well in Georgia and elsewhere.

The principal exception to the doctrine of sovereign immunity involves governmental vehicles. If a government employee is driving a county, city or state vehicle and they injure a third party, then typically the doctrine of sovereign immunity has been waived in this state. Nonetheless, for many other claims, when a government actor or employee damages a third party through acts of negligence, oftentimes it is the case that no claim can be filed because unless there has been an express legislative waiver of the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the law presumes that the government cannot be sued and that its sovereign immunity is maintained.

Large vans are frequently used to transport college and other school sports teams, commuters, students, day care children, the elderly, and church groups. The accident rates for these vans are alarming.

According to the National Safety Transportation Board, between 1994 and 2004, there were 1,512 fatal crashes involving 15-passenger vans. In 2004 alone, 120 occupants of 15-passenger vans died in crashes involving these vehicles A total of 642 of these were single-vehicle crashes and 515 of the vehicles rolled over. More than half of the 15-passenger vans involved in single-vehicle accidents rolled over, compared to one-third of passenger cars.

A major problem with 15-passenger vans is that their tires are often underinflated, leading to higher tire temperatures, faster tire deterioration, and diminished driving stability. Adding passengers and cargo causes the center of gravity to move upward and rearward, increasing a vehicles tendency to roll over and increasing the potential for the driver to lose control in emergency maneuvers.

About 190,000 MacGregor and Mitre folding soccer goals were recalled Tuesday, after the death of a young child. The recalled goals were manufactured in China. Anyone having one of these goals should remove it immediately.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission said a 20-month-old boy from Texas was strangled when his head and arm became entangled in the net of one of the recalled goals.

The gaps in the recalled nets are about 20 square inches, which is a dangerous size according to the CPSC. The agency says netting should have gaps less than 17 square inches or greater than 28 square inches, to prevent dangerous entrapment and strangulation.

Spanair JK5022: Creo que le interesaría ver este video animado, el cual fue preparado por la firma Kreindler:

http://www.kreindler.com/kreindler_news/news_current/Spanair5022-Full-animation-video.html

Para una consulta gratis, favor de enviar su correo electronico precionando aqui (haga clic aqui).

In our serious injury practice, regrettably, we have seen more and more cases involving sexual assault. These cases arise in of a variety of contexts. We have seen assaults on minor children committed by third parties (such as school or church officials), we have seen sexual assaults on wards of mental institutions committed by employees entrusted with their care and we have seen sexual assault cases involving rape where there has been negligent or gross security by apartment complexes where, for example, the tenant is attacked in her apartment in situations where the apartment complex was on notice of possible dangers and failed to provide adequate security and protection for the tenant.

These cases are, obviously, very traumatic for the victims of these horrible crimes. The cases are all the more challenging because the trauma is not only in the past, but likely will endure for a lifetime. Indeed, in most all of these cases, the victim has to undergo quite a bit of counseling to help them deal with the trauma of the event plus the understandable emotions, confusion and stress disorders that arise thereafter. Rape victims are oftentimes so traumatized as to require a lifetime of such therapy.

In any case involving an intentional tort, particularly those involving sexual assaults against innocent victims, we strive to work closely with the victim, their family and healthcare professionals to assist in the healing process. The legal remedies available to such victims, of course, are many times dependent upon the facts. If the perpetrator, such as an uncle, a neighbor or a church official has personal assets, litigation may help to provide some financial relief to cover future medical costs and to provide some element of compensation for the trauma. Many times, we also work with the prosecuting authorities and try to obtain funds under the State Crime Victim Compensation Fund. In other cases, particularly those against apartment complexes or other third party entities that have failed to adequately protect the victim of a sexual assault from a foreseeable attack, there may be sufficient available insurance to provide compensation for the victim.

Highly respected Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the United States Federal District Court in Brooklyn decided on Friday to unseal confidential materials about Eli Lillys top-selling antipsychotic drug Zyprexa.

Judge Weinstein’s ruling was part of an order that gave class-action status to a case brought by insurance companies, pension funds and unions that allege Lilly owes them billions of dollars they spent on the drug. They allege that Lilly hid the side effects of the drug and marketed it for unapproved uses.

The Judge ordered that the documents be made public, against the desires of Lilly, citing “the health of hundreds of thousands of people” and “fundamental questions” about the way drugs are approved for new uses. Judge Weinstein found that “Lilly’s legitimate interest in confidentiality does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure at this stage.”

Last month, consumer, public interest and scientific groups applauded President Bush for signing product safety reform legislation into law that will overhaul the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, was passed overwhelmingly by Congress. The new law will make consumer products safer by requiring that toys and infant products be tested before they are sold, and by banning lead and other harmful chemicals in toys, by creating a comprehensive publicly accessible consumer complaint database, give the CPSC the resources it needs to protect the public, increase civil penalties that CPSC can assess against violators of CPSC laws, and protect whistleblowers who report product safety defects.

A key portion of the legislation, deals with the safety of juvenile products such as cribs, high chairs and strollers.

Yesterday, the Food and Drug Administration began posting a list of prescription drugs under investigation for potential safety problems.The first list is a bare-bones compilation naming 20 medications and the potential issue for each. It provides no indication of how widespread or serious the problems might be, leading some consumer advocates to question its usefulness, and prompting industry worries that skittish patients might stop taking a useful medication if they see it listed.

Food and Drug Administration officials said they are trying to walk a fine line in being more open to the public while avoiding needless scares. Congress, in a drug safety bill passed last year, ordered the agency to post quarterly listings of medications under investigation.

The FDA emphasized that the listing of a drug and a potential safety issue does not mean that FDA is suggesting prescribers should not prescribe the drug or that patients taking the drug should stop taking the medication.