Trial Attorney Blog

Many wrongful death lawsuits have been brought against the manufacturer of the popular police taser device but according to the manufacturer’s boasts which are in the public record, no such lawsuits have been successful. And yet, practically every week it seems, another person is killed by the use of this product.

Our wrongful death and injury lawyers read last week a news article about a teenager who was killed by the use of a taser after an altercation inside of a grocery store near Charlotte, North Carolina. Apparently, a 17-year old teenager got into an argument with one of his supervisors at a grocery store and police officers were summoned to the scene. When the officers arrived, the teenager allegedly was highly agitated and allegedly refused all verbal demands. A police officer used a taser on the teen to subdue him. The taser killed the teenager, age 17. It appears from the news accounts of this incident, the death of this teenager was not warranted by his non-violent conduct as he had not committed nor was he charged with any crime. He was merely upset and agitated and was not a threat to anyone as he apparently had no weapons on his person.

Over and over again it seems that people are killed by this device and yet the device continues to be used by the police. While every case is different, of course, in many cases we read about the use of these tasers in cases where the suspect is not known to be violent, has committed no major felony or other violent crime, and yet is intentionally stunned with this product, sometimes with fatal results.

Thirteen (13) people have died (and many more injured) as a result of burns and other injuries sustained in the explosion at the Imperial Plant in Port Wentworth, Georgia. Investigators have expressed the opinion that sugar dust ignited and caused the explosion which resulted in these injuries and deaths. Because most of the people burned, injured or killed as a result of the explosion were employees of Imperial Sugar, unfortunately, they will be barred by law from suing their own employer. This is the state of law in Georgia. Workers’ Compensation benefits are available to injured employees but injured employees cannot sue their employer. The one exception to this “non-suit” rule is where a third party’s acts contributed to the injuries and/or caused the same. The employer still cannot be sued, but other “third party” companies can be sued if their acts contributed to the damages sustained.
From newspaper reports, it appears that Imperial Sugar contracted with a company called Stokes Contracting to clean sugar dust at the plant. Obviously, a full investigation would be required to see what the contractual duties and undertakings were, but assuming the newspaper reports are true, those injured and/or killed may have claims against Stokes Contracting and/or any other entity that provided such cleaning services. If the failure to properly clean the sugar dust out of the plant was a proximate cause of the explosion, then there could be third party liability claims brought against that third party, in this instance, apparently, Stokes Contracting.
Cases of this nature are always tragic for the families involved and for those seriously burned or injured. While only time will tell whether there are valid third party claims to be made, one would hope that the injured and severely burned would have remedies other than those provided under Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation statutory scheme. The Georgia Worker’s Compensation statutory scheme is quite limited in the remedies it provides to those injured on the job. For example, pain and suffering is not awarded at all and lost wage benefits are typically quite low, usually below $500.00 per week, which is very difficult for those who have been injured to live on. While Workers’ Compensation medical benefits are good, because these types of burn injuries can last for years and years, it is evident that those involved in these incidents will suffer for a lifetime and yet they receive no pain and suffering compensation under Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation scheme. This it is why it is important that someone involved in an incident of this nature confer with competent counsel to make sure that any third party remedies against third parties who may be also liable for their damages can be pursued.

Our Atlanta medical malpractice attorneys on occasion review cases in which surgical procedures are performed on the wrong side of the body.

Last Tuesday there was a report of a wrong site surgery at a Minnesota hospital. Surgeons at the hospital mistakenly removed the wrong kidney from a patient. The surgery was performed last Tuesday at Methodist Hospital in Minneapolis, but it wasn’t until the next day that it was discovered that the wrong kidney had been removed. A pathology examination of the removed kidney determined that it was healthy.

The doctor who removed the kidney was a veteran surgeon. The hospital while accepting responsibility for the actions, has pointed a finger at a paperwork mistake.

At least19 people have died, and hundreds became ill after being given heparin, a blood-thinning drug sold by drug manufacturer Baxter International. Baxter obtained the drug’s active ingredient from a Chinese manufacturer.

A belated inspection of the Chinese plant found substandard conditions. Recent lab tests revealed an unknown contaminant in batches of the drug, but researchers have not identified what precisely caused the allergic reactions which caused the deaths.

The Food and Drug Administration is required to inspect plants such as the one in China which supplied the heparin ingredient. However, under the Bush Administration, it has failed to follow this mandate.

Many surgery patients report that they awake during surgery. They say it feels like being trapped in a corpse, unable to move or scream. Some remember hearing their surgeons talk, and a few recall feeling intense pain.

Each year, as many as 40,000 of the 21 million patients undergoing surgery in the United States may experience inadequate anesthesia, leading to anxiety and even post-traumatic stress disorder if patients regain consciousness, according to the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.

A widely used device that employs brainwaves to help doctors prevent patients from waking up during surgery is no more effective than an older, far less costly technique, researchers said on Wednesday. A study of nearly 2,000 patients reported in The New England Journal of Medicine showed the BIS device, made by Aspect Medical Systems Inc., did not help doctors prevent any more patients from waking up while under inhaled anesthesia.

It seems that everyday our personal injury lawyers open the paper, we read about another wrongful death in the context of a high speed police chase. One such case occurred this past weekend in Augusta, Georgia when a Sheriff’s Deputy was chasing a 19-year old suspect. Initially the officer involved pulled the suspect over and was provided his ID and driver’s license. Thus, the officer knew who the suspect was and where he lived. While the officer went back to his car to check on his tags, the suspect took off. A chase commenced but during the chase the officer was advised by his supervisor to terminate the chase because of the danger to the public. The supervisor advised this officer not once, but twice to terminate the chase but he did not do so. The predictable result ensued, that being that while the suspect was fleeing at 80 to 85 miles per hour he ran through an intersection and broadsided another car with the result that an innocent third party was killed. Once again, a high speed police chase occurred involving a non-violent felony and an innocent person paid the price for this reckless disregard of proper police procedure with their life.

Finch McCranie, LLP recently filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Augusta within the last few weeks alleging another wrongful death in another high speed pursuit. In that case, the police were chasing a suspected shoplifter. Again, the danger presented by the offense that was the basis of the pursuit was far outweighed by the danger presented to the public by the chase itself. In that case, 3 people were killed including an unborn child. In the most recent case which occurred this past Saturday, what is most disturbing is that the officer continued to chase the known suspect after being advised that he should terminate his pursuit. Allegedly, the officer claims that the did not hear the directive given to him over his radio. While this seems questionable, it is clear that if the officer’s supervisor thought the pursuit should have been terminated the officer himself should have realized this well before the fatal collision.

What is most disturbing about these cases in Augusta is that they are representative of cases occurring throughout Georgia and elsewhere. Indeed, we had just posted an article to this Blog about the death of a 21 year old Sgt. at Fort Benning, Georgia where the police were chasing a juvenile for joyriding in a stolen pickup truck when this most recent death in Augusta occurred. Indeed, as of the writing of this entry to our blog, our lawyers have filed 6 different lawsuits involving 8 deaths all arising in the context of high speed pursuits.

In February of this year, an active member of the military at Fort Benning, Sgt. Joanna Joy Ringer, age 21, was reportedly killed as yet another innocent victim in a police chase case. This time, the, innocent victim, Ms. Ringer, was killed because the police were chasing a 17 year old teenager for joyriding in a stolen pickup truck. Ms. Ringer, like all such victims, was simply at the wrong place, at the wrong time when the fleeing suspect ran head on into her car.

How many innocent people have to die before the police will understand that the dangers caused by a police chase are far greater than the dangers caused by a joyriding teenager? Why is it so important to law enforcement to recover a stolen pickup truck when the death penalty to the innocent is the likely result of using a high speed pursuits to do so? These questions remain after the death of Sgt. Ringer, and many more, about whether such pursuits should ever be authorized when a non-violent felony is involved.

The police take the position, of course, that their job is to enforce the law and that it is important that they catch those who break the law. We agree. On the other hand, a 17 year old teenager who is joyriding is not necessarily a grave risk of causing deadly harm to the public. And yet we know from statistics that one person in this country dies everyday during police chases. Police chases are very dangerous to the innocent members of the public. We submit that it is not justifiable for the police to use to what amounts to deadly force in pursuing suspects for non-violent offenses when it is clear that the dangers to the public caused by the chase itself outweighs the dangers presented by the suspect being pursued.

Our personal injury lawyers read today about a serious accident case involving an overturned school bus which apparently lost control and overturned about 40 miles north of Atlanta near Canton, Georgia. It was traveling from one high school to a middle school when the accident happened. When the bus overturned, even though no students were ejected from the bus, according to initial reports, approximately 25 students were injured. Two were reported to be in critical condition.

Initial news accounts state that the bus driver apparently lost control of the bus after going around a curve. The bus overturned on its side. It is doubtful that this school bus was equipped with seatbelts. Had the seatbelts been in place, one must wonder whether the two students in critical condition would have been as seriously injured as they apparently were.

Approximately one year ago, another bus ran over the top of an exit ramp crashing off of a bridge onto its side on Interstate Highway 75. This involved the Bluffton University baseball team. There were seven (7) deaths associated with that incident. In that accident, there were no seatbelts available for the baseball team occupants and some of those killed had been ejected. In the most recent case involving the school bus, many were injured and some perhaps critically once again because of joint and concurring driver negligence and the lack of seatbelts.

In 2006, a disabled and brain damaged man, near death, was taken into an operating room at a California hospital in order to harvest his organs for donation. Law enforcement officials contend that what occurred in the operating room was a criminal act. The surgeon, Dr. Hootan Roozrokh has been criminally charged with prescribing excessive and improper doses of drugs, apparently in an attempt to hasten Mr. Navarro’s death to retrieve his organs sooner. The doctor is facing three felony counts relating to his actions

Central to the case is whether Dr. Roozrokh was pursuing organs at any cost or had become entangled in a web of misunderstanding about a lesser-used harvesting technique known as donation after cardiac death. Dr. Roozrokh has pleaded not guilty.

Transplanting organs from patients whose hearts have stopped, or cardiac-death donations, began to go out of vogue in the late 1960s and early ’70s after medical advances like life support and subsequent changes in the legal definition of death made donations from those declared brain dead more efficient. But health officials have encouraged cardiac-death donations in recent years.

Last Wednesday the Supreme Court of the United States made it harder for injury and wrongful death victims to sue manufacturers of federally approved medical devices. This decision will also impact cases involving dangerous drugs. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Estate of Charles Riegel could sue a company under state law over a medical device which had previously been cleared for sale by federal regulators. Under federal law, a company must prove the safety and effectiveness of a medical device before the United States Food and Drug Administration will approve it for the marketplace. In an 8 to 1 decision, the Court ruled against the Estate of the injured patient who suffered serious injuries when a catheter burst during a medical procedure. As a result of this Supreme Court decision, state lawsuits are barred to the extent that they might impose requirements that are different from federal requirements. In other words Federal law will prempt state law where the two are in conflict or different. Not surprisingly, the Bush Administration sided with the medical device industry, saying unfavorable state jury verdicts would force companies to alter product designs or product labels that had already gotten FDA approval. This case is bad news for people injured by defective medical devices. The fallout from last week’s Supreme Court decision in this case will no doubt be felt throughout the country. Attorneys with cases pending against device makers such as Medtronic, Stryker and Johnson & Johnson expect these companies to file Motions to Dismiss the lawsuits which are currently pending. Lawyers also are concerned that this ruling may prompt judges to dismiss product-injury lawsuits before injured plaintiffs can gain access to data that might prove that the companies used false or misleading data to get government approval to market the devices.